ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0627/98 by Christian Cabrol (UPE) to the Council (16 March 1998)

Subject: Preventing household fires

Every two minutes, on French territory alone, a fire breaks out in a private household; the annual total of such outbreaks is 250 000, 77 000 of which entail calling in the fire brigade. Household fires are responsible for 90% of fire accident fatalities; and fire is the second largest cause of accidental deaths amongst the under-fives. 70% of household fires occur between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m., and a recent inquiry has shown that 88% of the French population believe that it would be 'a good idea' to instal fire detectors in all houses. Only 2% of French households are so equipped.

Does the Council

1. have reliable data for all the Member States about accidents caused by household fires, detailing the circumstances, causes, victims and social costs? Has the Council already had this data analysed on a country-by-country basis, so as to compare the impact of different types of national legislation on the prevention of such accidents?

2. not believe that it would be useful and indeed essential to study this issue in depth at Union level, and, following such a study, is the Council prepared to put forward appropriate legislation on the prevention of household fires - with all the human tragedy and major cost that they represent in terms of treating the victims and reimbursing the material losses sustained - by making it obligatory, for example, to instal smoke detectors in all homes, as is done in other parts of the world?

Answer (13/14 July 1998)

The Council does not have detailed figures on accidents caused by household fires for all the countries of the Union.

The Council does not doubt that particular attention should be paid to this type of risk, but to date it has not received a specific Commission proposal. It would, however, remind the Honourable Member that:

- the proposal for a Decision establishing a general framework for Community activities in favour of consumers contains a specific section on the health and safety of consumers reproducing part of the Community's European Home and Leisure Accident Surveillance System (Ehlass);

- the Commission, in its amended proposal concerning a Decision on an accident prevention programme, adopted the approach taken by the European Parliament in its Opinion directed towards incorporating Ehlass in that programme.

Both proposals are currently being examined by the Council.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0486/98 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (27 February 1998)

Subject: Enforceability of guidelines, as agreed at the informal Council in Ireland (November 1996), in structural fund programmes

What is the Commission's view on the extent to which these guidelines are obligatory for Member States and individual project Monitoring Committees in delivering structural fund programmes and to which they provide voluntary guidance only? What mechanisms exist for the Commission to enforce the guidelines, and what sanctions are and can be imposed where guidelines are not followed? Does the Commission plan any changes in this respect for the new structural fund programming period 1999-2006?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (6 April 1998)

The Commission has made clear that the purpose of the guidelines was to provide a general policy and priority framework within which to make adjustments to current programmes. It would not be the intention to touch projects which were already under way and being satisfactorily implemented. This approach was endorsed by the informal meeting of ministers responsible for regional policy and spatial planning held in Ireland on 14-15 November 1996.

Part IV of the Commission's document ((Priorities for the adjustment of structural fund programmes to the end of 1999 - Commission guidelines. )) on this subject also states that it will be for the monitoring committees and relevant authorities to decide what adjustments are needed to ensure maximum value for money from public funds for the period to the end of 1999. Commission proposals for the new structural funds programming period again provide for the issuing of guidelines at the start of the preparation for the new period in order to make sure that the Commission's priority themes regarding regional policy are known in sufficient detail to be incorporated adequately in the programming process at national level.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0912/98 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE) to the Commission (26 March 1998)

Subject: Imports of frozen tuna and bonito from third countries

Can the Commission provide information on the volume of imports of frozen tuna and bonito from third countries, indicating the individual quantities by country of origin which cross European Union borders?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0907/98, E-0908/98, E-0909/98, E-0910/98, E-0911/98, E-0912/98, E-0913/98, E-0914/98 and E-0915/98 given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (30 April 1998)

Because of the length of the answer, which includes a number of tables, the Commission is sending it direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0470/98 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (27 February 1998)

Subject: Article 10

Given the budget appropriations 1994-98, what is the exact percentage of structural fund spending devoted to date to Article 10 during the current programming period? What amount would be required in the 1999 budget to ensure that the first one per cent is achieved overall? Is the Commission committed to putting this forward in its preliminary draft budget for 1999?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (7 April 1998)

Under the current programming period 1994-1999, 450 MECU have been allocated for spending under Article 10 of the European regional development fund (ERDF) Regulation ((OJ L 193, 31.7.1993. )). This represents approximately 0.56% of ERDF. The sum representing 1% would be some 800 MECU. However, the Commission does not intend to provide for an increase beyond 0.56% through its proposal for the 1999 budget.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0784/98 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission (18 March 1998)

Subject: Italian trading rules

The recent legislative decree regulating trade approved by the Council of Ministers of the Italian Republic of 16 January 1998 (implementing the authorization in Article 4 of Law 59/97) provides for the total abolition of the licence for small trading concerns of up to 300 m2 (Article 4), abolition of the registration requirement for traders setting up in business (Article 5) and consolidation of the present 14 marketing tables in just two sectors: foodstuffs and non-foodstuffs (Article 5(1)).

These rules will lead to anarchy on the market and serious imbalances and will be detrimental to small concerns that represent about 900 000 small businesses; they will also lead to the loss of some 60 000 jobs. With this decree, the actual value of the trading licence (which in many cases is high) would be reduced to zero, causing economic damage to those who acquired it previously and possibly violating Article 85 of the EC Treaty. In fact new concerns would have an advantage in that they could compete unfairly precisely because they would not have to meet any costs - as in the past - to set up in business. Lastly, the liberalization granted for areas under 300 m2 will merely lead to an excessive proliferation of mini-markets, stores and discount warehouses in a country such as Italy in which the average size of trading concerns is around 100 to 120 m2.

1. Do these measures not conflict with Directives 64/223/EEC ((OJ 56, 4.4.1964, p. 863. )) and 68/363/EEC ((OJ L 260, 22.10.1968, p. 1. )) on wholesale and retail trading?

2. Do they not conflict with the Green Paper on trade (Bulletin of the EU, Supplement 2/97) which calls for grater liberalization of the sector but stresses the need to protect jobs at the same time?

3. Might they not endanger free competition?

4. What is the Commission's general reaction?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (28 May 1998)

The Commission is conducting a detailed investigation of the problem raised by the Honourable Member and will inform her of the outcome as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0415/98 by Yvan Blot (NI) to the Commission (16 February 1998)

Subject: Payment periods in commercial transactions

The Commission has presented a communication on payment periods in commercial transactions, which incorporates some of the suggestions in the study it commissioned from the debt recovery company Intrum Justicia, which acted both as judge and judged in the matter. The communication and planned proposal for a directive envisage competition between debt recovery bodies and lawyers involved in debt recovery.

1. Can the Commission explain why it wants to introduce this competition and what improvements it is anticipating, seeing that it is not the lawyers' status and skills that are being called into question but slow national legal procedures?

2. Does the Commission think that individual interests will be equally well protected when commercial companies that are not subject to rules of professional conduct are involved?

3. Will the Commission state the legal basis for the proposal for a directive?

Is the Commission not exceeding its rights in proposing a text that makes radical changes in certain Member States' legal organization and law of procedure, since this is clearly outside its remit?

4. Can the Commission give full details of possible alternative methods of improving recovery times in commercial transactions?

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission (5 May 1998)

The Commission would like to state at the outset that it formulated its report on late payments in commercial transactions ((OJ C 216, 17.7.1997. )) after having proceeded to a wide consultation exercise during which 80% of those expressing an opinion were in favour of Community legislation on late payments. This included an open hearing at which representatives of various professions including the legal profession gave their opinion. While the Commission has cited statistical material from various studies, no external organisation has played a part in the decision-making procedure.

The Commission agrees with the Honourable Member that the quality and competence of the legal profession is not in question. It merely wants to ensure that creditors to whom payment is overdue have access to rapid, efficient and inexpensive redress procedures enabling them to obtain payment and compensation for damages.

The Commission has decided not to address the question of competition between lawyers and debt collection agencies in its proposal for a directive on late payment ((COM(1998) 126 final. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1259/98 by Edith Müller (V) to the Council (28 April 1998)

Subject: Raising of a loan to purchase the D3 building in Brussels

On 28 January 1998 the Bureau of the European Parliament decided to raise a loan of more than ECU 500 million, with the assistance of Société Espace Léopold, in order to be able to purchase the D3 building in Brussels.

Can the Council say whether this is in line with the outcome of the discussions held last year in this connection between Parliament, the Council and the Commission?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1259/98 and E-1519/98 (13/14 July 1998)

It emerged from the interinstitutional discussions mentioned by the Honourable Members that an indirect financing solution could be adopted.

Furthermore, it is for the European Parliament, as an autonomous administrative body, to work out, in compliance with the Treaties establishing the Communities, in particular their financial provisions, and the national legislations concerned, the solution which it considers most appropriate for the acquisition of its buildings.

The Council has not been informed of the inquiry referred to in point 3 of Question E-1519/98.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0842/98 by Freddy Blak (PSE) to the Commission (11 March 1998)

Subject: Approval of trawlers

An EU rule that trawlers landing frozen cod at EU ports have to be approved for the purpose will have disastrous consequences for the fishery industry and hence employment on the Danish island of Bornholm.

The Russian authorities are not approving enough trawlers. At present only 6 or 8 of more than 250 trawlers from the Barents Sea have been approved. This would mean shortages of frozen cod on Bornholm from April onwards and hence a loss of jobs.

1. Will the Commission amend the approval provisions so that fish frozen at sea on freezer vessels may be landed within a reasonable time without such vessels having to be approved by the Russian authorities?

2. If that is impossible, how does the Commission think this problem is going to be solved?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (29 April 1998)

Imports of fishery products from third countries are regulated since 1991 by Council Directive 91/493/EEC of 22 July 1991 laying down the health conditions for the production and the placing on the market of fishery products ((OJ L 268, 24.9.1991. )). This Directive also provides the conditions for internal production and foresees that the provisions applied to imports of fishery products shall be, at least, equivalent to those governing Community production. In particular, they provide the conditions that shall met by establishments to be approved to place fishery products on the Community market. It should be pointed out that the Directive includes as establishments not only land establishments but also vessels (factory, frozen or fishing).

Specific import conditions for Russia are established in Commission Decision 97/102/EC of 16 January 1997 laying down special conditions governing the import of fishery and aquaculture products originating in Russia ((OJ L 35, 5.2.1997. )) including the list of approved establishments. This list is permanently updated and at present includes 69 freezer vessels, 79 factory vessels and 21 processing plants. In the next weeks 8 factory vessels and 4 freezer vessels will be included. Currently there are at least 27 approved Russian vessels fishing cod in the Barents sea. Very soon 3 more will be added. The control of these establishments is a very important matter of public health and therefore imports can only be allowed from those establishments included in the list.

The Commission is aware of the problem raised by the Honourable Member. It has been discussed in several meetings of the standing veterinary committee and it will be tabled again in future meetings. The Agriculture Council of 16-17 February 1998 also discussed the topic.

The Commission is also ready to verify the effectiveness of Commission Decision 97/102/EC across the Community and if necessary to take the appropriate measures. However in no case should be the level of consumer protection in the Community be jeopardised.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0266/98 by Yiannis Roubatis (PSE) to the Commission (13 February 1998)

Subject: The Tudjman regime's tactics in Croatia

According to a report in the International Herald Tribune, the Tudjman regime in Croatia is prosecting the Croatian Helsinki Committee and the independent newspaper Feral Tribune, and it is seeking to impose controls on and abolish Croatian and foreign institutions which do not meet with its approval, subsidiaries of foreign undertakings, humanitarian and other non-governmental organisations which are struggling for the independence of the mass media, democracy and human rights in Croatia.

The reason given by the Tudjman regime for this prosecution is that all the organisations are introducing a dangerous new ideology into Croatia.

Will the Commission say:

1. Is it aware of these tactics by the Tudjman regime?

2. Does it intend to finance and to support by every means the institutions in Croatia which are being prosecuted?

3. Does it intend to call on the Croatian President to cease prosecuting bodies which are supporting the independence of the mass media, human rights and democracy in Croatia?

Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (13 March 1998)

The Commission shares the Honourable Member's concern in relation to the freedom of association and expression in Croatia, in particular as regards recent laws and restrictions on the activities of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and independent media. It has voiced its concern at various levels and on multiple occasions in contacts with the Croatian authorities.

Respect for human rights is one of the conditions for the development of improved relations between Croatia and the Community. Indeed, freedom of expression and of association are specifically mentioned in the Council conclusions of 29 April 1997 which set out conditions for the development of bilateral relations with the countries covered by the Community's regional approach towards the countries of South Eastern Europe.

The Commission provides support (MECU almost 5.5 to date) to civil society organisations and to human rights monitoring and advocacy groups in Croatia, as well as to independent media, and intends to continue its support in these fields.

The Honourable Member is further referred to the reply given to written question E-3946/97 by M. Swoboda ((OJ C 187, 16.6.1998, p. 99. )) and to the Commission's intervention during the debate in plenary concerning human rights and civic society in Croatia on 18 December 1997.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0350/98 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (17 February 1998)

Subject: Environmental taxes

The Commission has issued a communication entitled 'Environmental Taxes and Charges in the Single Market' (COM(97)0009).

Once the Commission has completed its assessment of the economic and environmental impact, will it draw up an additional communication clearly spelling out the exact criteria for establishing such taxes?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (30 March 1998)

When the economic and environmental implications of the use of these instruments has been assessed, the Commission will draw its policy conclusions. It is therefore too early to know whether the assessment will show a need for more explicit criteria or not.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0877/98 by Gunilla Carlsson (PPE) to the Commission (26 March 1998)

Subject: Warning on Swedish snuff

My Written Question E-3530/97 ((OJ C 174, 8.6.1998, p. 73. )) concerned the fact that EU Directive 92/41/EEC ((OJ L 158, 11.6.1992, p. 30. )) stipulates that packets of Swedish snuff must be marked with the words 'Causes cancer'. There is no scientific basis to that claim. Instead, several research findings indicate that no link whatever can be proved. To require a particular product to be marked with a warning which is actually erroneous, seriously undermines confidence in the EU. The Commission's answer of 20 January deals in essence only with the size of the warning, not the fact that directives based on erroneous information undermine confidence in the EU. Would the Commission, therefore, say whether it will take the initiative to amend the text of the Directive concerned?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (4 May 1998)

The legal texts governing labelling of tobacco products (Council Directive 89/622/EEC ((OJ L 359, 8.12.1989. )) as amended by Council Directive 92/41/EEC of 15 May 1992 amending Directive 89/622/EEC on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning the labelling of tobacco products ((OJ L 158, 11.6.1992. ))) were adopted by the Council on the basis of available scientific evidence, specifically cited in the recitals to those texts. No subsequent evidence has been presented to the Commission showing that tobacco products do not represent a threat to human health.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0514/98 by Edouard des Places (I-EDN) to the Commission (19 February 1998)

Subject: The internal market and the agricultural guidance law

In France the draft agricultural guidance law, which has been submitted by the Minister of Agriculture to the farming associations, provides, in title I, for the introduction of 'Territorial Farming Contracts' (CTE).

These contracts would be signed with the administrative authority, cover all farming activity, comprise a programme of measures taking into account production targets for goods and services, area management and environmental protection and would be consistent with national and regional guidelines.

The explanatory statement for Article 3 on the establishment of a fund to finance the CTE clearly specifies that this fund will initially be financed by national appropriations and subsequently by appropriations generated by adjustment of CAP aids resulting from the reform.

Does the Commission think that supplementary aids granted under these CTE, which would give rise to a distortion of competition between producers of the various Member States, would be in conformity with the rules relating to the internal market?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (6 March 1998)

Under the third paragraph of Article 93 of the EC Treaty, the Commission must be informed, in sufficient time to enable it to submit its comments, of any plans to grant or alter aid. If, following a preliminary examination, it considers that such a plan is not compatible with the common market having regard to Article 92, the Commission is to initiate the procedure provided for in paragraph 2 of Article 93 of the EC Treaty. The Member State concerned may not put its proposed measures into effect until this procedure has resulted in a final decision.

The Commission endeavours to make sure that the Member States comply with the provisions of Community legislation when granting aid in the agricultural sector.

However, since it has not yet been informed under the aforementioned Article of the aid referred to by the Honourable Member, the Commission is not in a position to comment on the substance of this aid.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0550/98 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (4 March 1998)

Subject: Regional operational programme for Attiki - sub-programme 1, measure 1

Sub-programme 1, measure 1 of the regional operational programme for Attiki is concerned with water supply, drainage and biological purification. According to the timetable, ECU 20 620 million of the public funds earmarked for this purpose, should have been utilised by the end of 1997.

1. What progress has been made with the actual project?

2. Were changes made (and if so what changes) during the CSF review and what were the budgetary implications?

3. Which of the drainage networks are presenting the greatest problems concerning the utilisation of appropriations and what are the principal reasons for the delay?

4. What funds had been utilised by 31 December 1997?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (22 April 1998)

According to the financing tables amended on 21 October 1997, public expenditure on measure 1.1 of the 'Attiki' operational programme (water supply network, sewers and treatment plants) programmed up to 1997 amounts to ECU 13.2 million.

At the last meeting of the Monitoring Committee of the Community support framework (CSF), held on 31 October 1997, no amendments were made to the regional programmes.

For technical details of the work programmed, its progress and the causes of any delays, the Commission would request the Honourable Member to apply to the Attiki regional authorities, which are responsible for implementation of the CSF.

At the end of 1997, the appropriations used amounted to ECU 10.7 million.