ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0284/98 by Mark Watts (PSE) to the Commission (17 February 1998)

Subject: ISM Code (Council Regulation 3051/95)

Is the ISM Code (Regulation No 3051/95) ((OJ L 320, 30.12.1995, p. 14. )) being fully implemented and enforced in all Member States?

If not, why not, and will the Commission please list all complaints received and other cases of non-compliance under investigation?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0283/98 and E-0284/98 given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission (25 March 1998)

Since Council Regulation No (EC) 3051/95 of 8 December 1995 on the safety management of roll-on/roll-off passenger ferries does not provide for Member States to supply to the Commission information about the number of inspectors responsible for ensuring compliance with the Regulation in each Member State, the Commission is not in a position to provide a detailed reply to the Honourable Member's question.

The Commission does have information relating to the documents of compliance and the safety certificates issued for companies and ferries operating regular ro-ro passenger transport services to or from ports of the Member States as at 1 July 1997. On the basis of that information it appears that Council Regulation No (EC) 3051/95 is being implemented and enforced by the Member States. That assessment is substantiated by the outcome of the bilateral (on-location) consultations being carried out by the Commission with the Member State administrations. These consultations have not yet been completed and it should be borne in mind that the monitoring of the implementation and enforcement of the Regulation is an ongoing process, which includes, according to Article 8 of the Regulation, a review by the Commission of the implementation of the Regulation and the proposal of appropriate measures by the year 1999.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0115/98 by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission (30 January 1998)

Subject: Battery hens

When does the Commission plan to bring forward its proposals to update the battery hen Directive?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (13 March 1998)

The Commission adopted on 11 March 1998 its report ((COM(98) 135 final. )) to the Council and the Parliament as provided in Article 9 of Council Directive 88/166/EEC of 7 March 1988 laying down minimum standards for the protection of laying hens kept in battery cages ((OJ L 74, 19.3.1988. )), together with the proposals relevant to the report's conclusions.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0041/98 by Ulf Holm (V) to the Commission (29 January 1998)

Subject: Rules on the importation of domestic animals

When Sweden joined the EU some of the rules pertaining to the importation of domestic animals were changed. Now it is enough to have a veterinary certificate from the exporting country and in certain cases deworming and vaccination. There is a risk that an infected animal may not have developed antibodies and that the infection may therefore not be discovered. The previous rules which stipulated six months' quarantine considerably increased the possibility of preventing the importation of infected animals.

So there is an increased risk of infection spreading from imported domestic animals to game and back to domestic animals and human beings.

How does the Commission intend to tackle this problem?

Does the Commission consider that there is sufficient research into how susceptible various kinds of game are to infectious diseases?

Does the Commission think that there is a readiness in the EU to deal with the possible spread of infectious diseases from domestic animals to game?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (10 March 1998)

The Swedish national rules which have been introduced as an alternative to quarantine for rabies for the introduction of domestic pets require that the animals be vaccinated and pass a blood test for the detection of anti-bodies at least four months after vaccination. This waiting period after vaccination ensures that the animal is not incubating rabies and a successful blood test further ensures that the animal will not develop rabies.

The Commission is aware of the possibility of introducing to wild life via domestic animals, contagious diseases other than rabies, such as echnicoccosis, distemper and leishmaniasis. It will make suitable proposals on this matter at an appropriate time.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0439/98 by Niels Sindal (PSE) to the Commission (24 February 1998)

Subject: State aid

What are the Commission's views about authorizing French state aid to get the Japanese car company Toyota to invest in France?

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

The French authorities have not yet notified the Commission of their plans to grant aid to encourage Toyota to invest in Valenciennes. When they do so, the Commission will take a decision on the basis of the Community framework on state aid to the motor vehicle industry.

The objective of the framework is to establish transparency in aid flows and to apply strict discipline to the granting of aid in order to ensure as far as possible that competition is not distorted within the industry. The framework takes account of regional development imperatives and of the substantial overcapacity that exists within the motor vehicle industry in Europe.

A summary of the motor vehicle framework for 1998-2000 has been sent direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0446/98 by Concepció Ferrer (PPE) to the Commission (27 February 1998)

Subject: Interreg II programme

The aim of the Interreg II programme on cross-border cooperation is to implement effective mechanisms to facilitate cooperation between frontier regions. With regard to each of the four measures concerning Spain under the Interreg II programme, will the Commission say what projects have been approved for the period 1994-1999, what funds have been granted, where the projects are located and what percentage of the total cost of each of the projects has been funded?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (31 March 1998)

As with the Structural Funds in general, the Interreg II ((OJ C 180, 1.7.1994.)) Community Initiative is implemented in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity. The Commission therefore approved multiannual operational programmes, while the selection and approval of projects is left to the national, regional or local authorities, as appropriate.

Under Interreg II, the Commission has allocated ECU 484.7 million (in 1994 prices) to Spain for Interreg IIA (development of the border areas and cross-border cooperation), ECU 80 million (in 1995 prices) for Interreg IIB (construction of interconnectors between the Portuguese and Spanish gas grids) and ECU 116.1 million (in 1996 prices) for Interreg IIC (regional planning), including approximately ECU 10 million for transnational cooperation projects and ECU 106 million to alleviate drought.

Spain is currently involved in several cross-border or transnational operational programmes (OPs) in receipt of the above Community funding, namely:

- OP for Spain-France, total volume: approximately ECU 140 million; total Community contribution: ECU 1.6 million;

- OP for Spain-Portugal, total volume: approximately ECU 755 million; total Community contribution: ECU 52.0 million;

- OP for Spanish regions bordering Morocco, total volume: approximately ECU 185 million; total Community contribution: ECU 100.0 million;

- OP for the Mediterranean and the French and Italian Alps, total volume: approximately ECU 23 million; total Community contribution: ECU 13.3 million;

- OP for South-West Europe, total volume: approximately ECU 10 million; total Community contribution: ECU 5.2 million.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0344/98 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (17 February 1998)

Subject: Framework for Community action in the field of water policy

The Commission has drawn up a proposal for a Council Directive establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy (COM(97)0049 - 97/0067(SYN)) ((OJ C 184, 17.6.1997, p. 20.)). Will the Commission insert a new article providing for involvement of the public and water management companies with a view to:

1. pointing out the need and laying down a requirement to set up advisory bodies to assist the authorities concerned, which would have the tasks of assessing catchment area plans, supervising their implementation, and pursuing additional information and social awareness campaigns;

2. compiling compulsory public registers for each catchment area, covering water quality and discharge monitoring, supervision of concessions, and any other data that might be useful for the purpose of implementing the standards specified in the framework Directive?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0344/98, E-0345/98, E-0346/98, E-0347/98 and E-0348/98 given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (18 March 1998)

The Parliament has scheduled its discussions on the Commission's proposal for a Council directive establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy ((COM(97)47. COM(97)614. COM(98)76. )) for the March 1998 and April 1998 meetings of the environment committee. The Commission will address the questions raised by the Honourable Member during those meetings.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0975/98 by Carlos Robles Piquer (PPE) to the Council (31 March 1998)

Subject: Political prisoners in Cuba

Regarding the Council's reply to my written question E-3519/97 ((OJ C 158, 25.5.1998, p. 138. )) on relations with Cuba, I should like to know whether the phased dialogue beginning at technical level referred to will strictly observe the conditions laid down in the current Joint Position with regard to the Cuban Government; and whether there has been a request that the political prisoners released in tribute to his holiness Jean Paul II should include Felix Antonio Boné Carcasses, René Gómez Manzano, Vladimiro Roca Antúnez and Mrs Marta Beatriz Roque Cabello, all of whom are being held in prison for the simple crime of having written that 'the motherland belongs to everybody'?

Answer (8 June 1998)

The European Union's common position on Cuba of 2 December 1996 states that in order to facilitate peaceful change in Cuba, the Union will encourage the reform of internal legislation concerning political and civil rights, including the Cuban criminal code. It is against this background, and at a technical level, that was organized the mission of legal experts which the Commission sent to Cuba in accordance with the Presidency's recommendations which the Council approved on 8 December 1997. The report on this mission will be analysed by the Council and will constitute one of the elements to be taken into consideration at the next evaluation of the common position which is due to take place in June 1998. In accordance with the provisions of paragraph 4 of the common position, it is as the Cuban authorities make progress towards democracy that the Union will lend its support to that process and will examine the appropriate use of the means at its disposal for that purpose.

As for the second question put by the Honourable Member, the Council would like to point out that on 24 February 1998 the Presidency made a declaration on behalf of the European Union in which it welcomes the Cuban Government's decision to release immediately a certain number of prisoners in response to the Pope's appeal and in which it urges the authorities to liberate and fully reintegrate into society all who have been imprisoned for having peacefully expressed their political views, including the four leading members of the Internal Dissidence Working Group.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0533/98 by Marjo Matikainen-Kallström (PPE) to the Commission (2 March 1998)

Subject: Aid to the Mexican Government to investigate the Acteal massacre

On 22 December 1997 a massacre was committed in the village of Acteal, in the province of Chiapas, Mexico, which shocked the whole world. To find the perpetrators of this act and ascertain the reasons for it, the Mexican Government has launched large-scale investigations throughout the country. Efforts have also been made to organize aid for the inhabitants of Acteal.

In view of the above, what measures has the Commission taken to organize humanitarian aid to those suffering as a result of the disaster and to offer expert aid to the Mexican Government to clear up the crime?

Answer given by Mr Marin on behalf of the Commission (31 March 1998)

After the tragic events of Acteal in December 1997 and in line with the resolution adopted by the Parliament on this subject in January 1998, the Commission examined the possibility of providing humanitarian aid for the population uprooted as a result of the massacre. On 19 February 1998, the Commission approved an humanitarian aid package totalling 1.45 MECU.

The aid will be channelled through the German and Spanish Red Cross and the non governmental organisation (NGO) Medicos del Mundo, in collaboration with local NGOs (Mexican Red Cross and Caritas Mexico). Activities envisaged under this decision include food and medical aid as well as provisional shelter for the affected population.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0614/98 by María Izquierdo Rojo (PSE) to the Council (16 March 1998)

Subject: Violence against women

The European Parliament recently adopted a resolution on the need to establish a European Union wide campaign for zero tolerance of violence against women ((OJ C 304, 6.10.1997, p. 25. )), urging the Governments of the Member States to take violence against women more seriously and include it on their political agenda.

Bearing in mind that in Spain alone during 1997, 61 women were killed in incidents involving this kind of violence, a figure higher than that for victims of ETA terrorist vioence, what measures and actions will the Council take during the current year to combat violence against women on a European scale?

Answer (28 May 1998)

Violence against women is a subject that Member States of the European Union take very seriously indeed. For example, at the last Labour and Social Affairs Council meeting on 15 December 1997, violence against women was one of the three topics discussed as part of a debate on the follow-up to the UN Conference on Women held in Beijing in 1995. The Council reviewed the measures taken by Member States and underlined the important work done through the STOP and the DAPHNE Programmes to combat violence against women and children, whatever form it might take.

In March 1998, the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women focused on violence against women; the European Union was represented at this Conference and adopted a statement condemning all forms of violence against women.

The Presidency is currently considering, together with the Commission, the possibility of initiatives on violence against women being taken by the European Union in 1999.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0403/98 by Lis Jensen (I-EDN) to the Commission (24 February 1998)

Subject: Number of Council recommendations since 1986

If statistics exist on the number of recommendations put forward by the Council, how many have there been since 1986, and to what extent have they been implemented by the Member States?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (24 March 1998)

Between 1986 and 1997, the Council adopted 37 recommendations addressed to the Member States.

The Commission has no statistics on their implementation by the Member States.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0231/98 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (13 February 1998)

Subject: Dam on the River Arachthos

It is planned to build a hydroelectric dam on the River Arachthos in the region of Aghios Nikolaos in the municipality of Daphnotis. This dam will create a reservoir of five km2.

According to allegations by ecological associations and local inhabitants, this project is not needed to meet energy requirements, since more economical alternatives exist (natural gas-fired combined cycle plants). Given that: the dam and reservoir will raise the groundwater level, causing greater subsidence and creating the potential for major disasters; the reservoir will cover two local monuments of historical and cultural interest, the Bridge of Plaka and the customs building; the special environmental impact assessment commissioned by the Epirus region is opposed to the project and proposes that the river bed be declared a nature protection area and that all projects be ruled out;

will the Commission say:

1. Is it aware of these allegations?

2. Does an environmental impact assessment exist for this project, and have the alternative solutions been studied?

3. Is there a comprehensive proposal for the protection of the region which is already burdened by other similar projects?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (18 March 1998)

1. The Commission is not aware of the planned hydroelectric dam on the river Arachthos in Epirus as this project is not submitted for Community financing.

2. According to preliminary information an environmental impact assessment according to Council Directive 85/337/EEC of the 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment ((OJ L 175, 5.7.1985. )) is being carried out. An environmental impact study has been completed by the promoter and will shortly be submitted to the competent authorities of the ministry of Environment for authorisation, which under the Greek law has the form of a ministerial decision with terms and conditions to be met. The authorities assess all elements including alternative solutions when applicable, before issuing the authorisation. Furthermore, the estuary of the river Arachthos is included in a special protection area ('Amvrakikos kolpos'), classified pursuant to Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979, on the conservation of wild birds ((OJ L 103, 25.4.1979. )) and the Commission will therefore draw the attention of the Hellenic authorities to the need for an appropriate assessment of the likely ecological impact of the dam on that site.

3. The Commission is not aware of a comprehensive proposal for the protection of the region with respect to the existence of similar projects.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0759/98 by Christa Randzio-Plath (PSE) to the Commission (2 March 1998)

Subject: Information on the disbursement of EU funds for Hamburg from 1995 to date

What amount of EU appropriations, from which programmes and funds, has been disbursed for the benefit of Hamburg since 1995?

1. to promote employment in Hamburg

a) from the European Regional Development Fund

b) from the European Social Fund

c) from the European Agricultural Guarantee and Guidance Fund (EAGGF) and other EU resources

d) special initiatives to promote women's interests.

2. to combat long-term unemployment

3. to promote R& D projects

a) for the University of Hamburg

b) for the Hamburg Technische Hochschule (Technical Higher Education Institute)

c) for the Hochschule für Wirtschaft und Politik (Higher Education Institute for Economics and Politics)

d) for Hamburg businesses

4. to promote relations and trade with the countries of Central and Eastern Europe and the republics of the CIS

5. from programmes in the energy and environment sectors.

6. from the youth programmes (Youth for Europe and Voluntary Service)

7. from the education programmes (Socrates, Erasmus, Lingua, Leonardo da Vinci, Tempus etc.)

8. for women's projects

9. for the promotion of the media and cultural projects

What is the Commission's assessment of the success of these measures in Hamburg?

Supplementary answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (4 June 1998)

Further to its answer of 19 March 1998 ((OJ C 304 du 2.10.1998, p. 154. )), the Commission is now able to provide the following additional information.

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-0878/98 by Per Gahrton (V) to the Commission (26 March 1998)

Subject: Seeds used by non-professional growers in Sweden

Following Sweden's entry into the EU, the authority responsible for seed control (Statens Utsädeskontroll) wrote to Swedish seed sellers threatening them with prosecution unless they stop selling seeds which, according to the authorities, are banned under current EU rules, e.g. Easter Egg (radish), Buttercup (squash), Early Cascade etc., (tomato) and Feurio (chard).

Does the Commission consider it reasonable for the EU to decide which seeds non-professional growers in Sweden may use? Is this consistent with the subsidiarity principle? Does the Commission consider that the Swedish authorities are applying EU rules correctly? Can the Commission envisage amending the rules or, alternatively, allowing the marketing in Sweden of seeds which are found to be suited to the biological, ecological and meteorological conditions in Sweden?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0851/98 and E-0878/98 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (24 April 1998)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the reply it gave to Oral Question H-246/98 by Mr Lindqvist during question time at Parliament's march 1998 part-session ((Debates of the Parliament (March 98). )).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1023/98 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Council (3 April 1998)

Subject: Schengen Agreement and need for more personnel at Greek borders

Article 1 of the 'Convention applying the Schengen Agreement of 14 June 1985' defines the internal and external borders of the Schengen countries. Articles 2 and 3 concern the crossing of the internal and external borders.

Implementation of the Agreement calls for an increase in personnel to guard the external borders, particularly in the case of countries such as Greece which, following its adoption of the Agreement, is required to man hundreds of Schengen entry points. It should be noted that the Greek coastline is 80% the length of Africa's and 150% that of Europe's, while its mainland borders (all with non-Schengen countries) are over 1 500 km.

Is there any provision for financial assistance to Greece to cover the sharp increase in manning requirements at Schengen entry points, a cost which the rest of the countries participating in the Schengen Agreement not only do not have but have been relieved of to a significant extent as they were able to release a substantial number of personnel from duty at their borders with countries which are also members of Schengen?

Answer (29 June 1998)

The question put by the Honourable Member is connected with the application of the Schengen Agreement and does not therefore fall within the Council's field of competence.