ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0849/98

by Marco Cellai (NI) to the Commission

(26 March 1998)

Subject: Appeal to the Court of Justice by the Commission

According to press reports in December last year the Commission has decided to appeal to the Court of Justice with a view to bringing infringement proceedings against the Italian Government for the alleged absence in Law 236/95 of transitional arrangements to safeguard the acquired rights of language assistants ("collaboratori linguistici", formerly known as "lettori") already working in Italian universities in accordance with Presidential Decree 382/80. This move essentially ignored the meaning of the judgment passed by that Court (Section V) of 20 November 1997. The present request to bring proceedings is clearly based on confusion between the terms "lecturer" and "lettore". The Commission in no way indicated how the Italian Government has failed to respect the "acquired rights", since the rules introduced in Law 236/95 guarantee the safeguarding of the rights acquired by the parties concerned under the previous legal framework and improve their treatment overall.

In view of the above, can the Commission say:

1. whether and to what extent the Commission's decision was influenced by articles in the press or views expressed by European members of parliament;

2. what the legal bases for the appeal are?

Answer given by MrMonti on behalf of the Commission

(5 June 1998)

The Commission is conducting a detailed investigation of the problem raised by the Honourable Member and will inform him of the outcome as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2542/98

by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission

(1 September 1998)

Subject: Promotion of the typical agricultural products and handicrafts of Apulia

The Italian region of Apulia is not only of great cultural but also social and economic interest owing to its agricultural products and handicrafts. For this reason there are various sectoral organizations and associations which instigate activities to promote and develop these products.

Can the Commission answer the following questions:

1. Are there any Commission programmes or initiatives aimed at funding measures to promote typical products and handicrafts of regions such as Apulia?

2. what types of measure might come within the scope of those programmes?

3. what organizations or bodies can be promoters of those activities?

4. in how many and what cases has Italy benefited from such programmes?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(9 November 1998)

Under the Community Support Framework (1994-99) for the Objective 1 regions of Italy, the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) may grant assistance to craft industries and the Guidance Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) may help improve productive activities in agriculture. With the agreement of the Commission, the region of Apulia included in its implementation of the CSF a programme of assistance for craft industries totalling ECU 105 million, of which the ERDF contributed ECU 26 million. This programme included aid for investment and services to small and medium-sized craft firms and measures to help them secure access to credit.

With regard to agriculture and rural development, ECU 20 million (of which the EAGGF provided 50 %) was allocated to a measure to develop and promote typical regional quality food and agricultural products. The beneficiaries of these measures may be public administrations in the region, associations of agricultural producers, associations for the development of agricultural and food products and associations of businessmen concerned with such products.

The details of this assistance were set out in the operational programme for the region which the Commission approved on 22 May 1995 and more fully in the annexes to the amending decision of 15 June 1998, a copy of which is being sent to the Honourable Member and to Parliament¢s Secretariat.

All regional programmes in Italy include measures of this type. Financial commitments are to be completed by the end of 1999 with final payments made by the end of 2001.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3558/98

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(1 December 1998)

Subject: Mutagens

Council Directive 67/548/EEC(1) on the approximation of laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous substances, divides mutagens into three categories.

In reaffirming that only categories 1 and 2 are important as regards the amendment, it is stated that category 1 covers only substances whose mutagenic effects on humans have been directly proven, and that it is accepted that in practice it is extremely difficult to prove such effects. The substances that fall into category 2 are therefore of considerable practical importance. These are substances which can be shown, by means of "appropriate research using animals" and "other relevant information", to cause hereditary genetic damage.

Can the Commission, as a precautionary measure, treat these types of mutagen as carcinogens for the purposes of the directive.

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(25 February 1999)

In the context of the programme "Europe against cancer" an action plan has been launched by Council Decisions 90/238/Euratom, ECSC, EEC(2) and 93/362/EEC(3) to focus attention on substances and preparations considered to be carcinogens. Following the adoption of Directive 94/60/EC(4), 14th amendment to Directive 76/769/EEC on restrictions on the marketing and use of dangerous substances and preparations(5), the Commission is required to propose directives prohibiting the use by consumers of substances classified as carcinogens, mutagens or toxic to reproduction categories 1 or 2. The proposals from the Commission must take account of the risks and advantages of the substances as well as of the Community legislative provisions on risks analysis.

To date, the use by consumers of about 850 substances classified as carcinogenic, mutagenic or toxic to reproduction category 1 or 2 has been prohibited.

In addition to this information, and with regard to the risks related to exposure to carcinogens at work, the Commission confirms that the Honourable Member's suggestions have already been taken into account in the amended proposal for a Council Directive(6) amending for the second time Directive 90/394/EEC on the protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to carcinogens at work, which was adopted by the Commission on 12 November 1998 following receipt of the European Parliament's opinion.

(1) OJ L 196, 16.8.1967, p. 1.

(2) OJ L 137, 30.5.1990.

(3) OJ L 150, 22.6.1993.

(4) OJ L 365, 31.12.1994.

(5) OJ L 262, 27.9.1976.

(6) OJ C 392, 16.12.1998.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3442/98

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(24 November 1998)

Subject: Ambient air

With reference to the proposal for a Council directive relating to limit values for sulphur dioxide, oxides of nitrogen, particulate matter and lead in ambient air (COM(97) 500 final - 97/0266/SYN)(1), could the Commission ascertain whether or not the limit values for sulphur dioxide (SO2) could come into force as early as 2005 (the scheduled date for other harmful substances) and not just in 2010, as laid down in the proposal for a directive?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(26 January 1999)

The proposal for a Council directive relating to limit values for sulphur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and oxides of nitrogen, particulate matter and lead(2), does in fact set limit values for sulphur dioxide to come into force in 2005. If the Honourable Member is referring to the limit values for nitrogen dioxide (NO2) to protect health to be met by 1 January 2010, it is the Commission's view that a faster timetable is not technically feasible for the Community as a whole. Individual Member States may set shorter timescales if they so choose.

(1) OJ C 9, 14.1.1998, p. 6.

(2) OJ C 360, 23.11.1998.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3953/98

by Nuala Ahern (V) to the Commission

(4 January 1999)

Subject: Euratom's budget for 1999

Why has the Commission proposed to reduce by 15 % the resources to be made available to Euratom for the application of "specific safeguards for large-scale plutonium processing plants" (Item B4-2021) in the 1999 budget?

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission

(8 March 1999)

The reduction under budget line B4-2021 amounts to only 1,5 % in terms of commitment appropriations. It is mainly due to the fact that two major investment projects will be finalised early in 1999, namely the on-site safeguards laboratories at the reprocessing plants at La Hague and Sellafield.

Since the large scale plutonium processing plants are already in production or undergoing the commissioning phase, the focus of spending will change in the coming years from investments in safeguards equipment to maintenance activities and the recruitment and training of qualified inspectors for the highly complex inspection activities to be performed in these plants.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3917/98

by Graham Mather (PPE) to the Commission

(4 January 1999)

Subject: Ecofin Council meeting of 1 December 1998

At this meeting, the Code of Conduct Group asked the Commission to complete as soon as possible two studies: a comparative study of administrative practices, and a cross-country review of the taxation of holding company activities and intra-group activities within Member States.

Can the Commission please tell me:

1. By whom will these studies be conducted?

2. If an external consultant is being employed for this purpose, what is his/her fee?

3. What are the precise terms of reference of these studies?

4. By when is it envisaged that these studies will be completed?

5. Does the Commission plan to make these studies available to MEPs as soon as they are completed?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(10 March 1999)

The Commission has been asked to commission a study on administrative practices by an external consultant who has practical experience with this issue in each of the 15 Member States. This study should also cover a cross-country review of intra-group activities within the Member States. A cross-country review of the taxation of holding company activities will be carried out by the Commission on the basis of publicly available information and that to be supplied by the Member States.

On 8 December 1998, the Commission launched a tender procedure for the study on administrative practices. The procedure has not yet been finalised. Once the study contract has been awarded, the Commission will publish a post-information notice in the Official journal which will provide information about the consultant with whom the contract has been concluded.

The study on administrative practices will examine and describe, on the basis of practical experience with these issues, the scope and degree of administrative discretion with regard to business taxation in each of the 15 Member States and the practical procedures used for determining transfer prices for controlled transactions in relation to intra-group service activities and financial services. For the cross-country review of holding company regimes, being undertaken by the Commission, no further terms of reference have been determined.

The purpose of the studies is to inform the assessment of fiscal measures by the code of conduct group. Once the studies are completed, the Commission will present the results of the studies to the group. They will be made available to the Parliament in due course.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3234/98

by David Martin (PSE) to the Commission

(26 October 1998)

Subject: A single market for opiates

Could the Commission please outline the Community-wide approach to the free movement of opiates and say what measures it is taking to create a single market for opiates?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(15 January 1999)

Opiates, products derived from opium, fall into the category of drugs whose manufacture, importation, exportation and use are governed by the provisions of the 1961 Vienna Convention, to which all the Member States are signatories but not the Community. Since they are harmful to health and may be a basis for trafficking, opiates are subject to strict regulations issued by each of the Member States, which, in the absence of Community legislation on the subject, have responsibility in this field. Under the provisions of Article 36 of the EC Treaty, the Member States are, in particular, entitled to take measures to prohibit or restrict imports of opiates from other Member States. For almost ten years the Commission has tried on a number of occasions, and again very recently, to get the Member States to establish a common approach both to the supervised movement of opiates in the Community and to the supervision of imports of opiates from non-member countries. This has proved impossible, since most Member States wish to retain total control of the flows of opiates across their borders. Therefore the Commission is at present unable to take any practical initiatives in this field.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3769/98

by Susan Waddington (PSE) to the Commission

(11 December 1998)

Subject: Treatment of British passport holders by French border police

In response to my Written Question P-2892/98(1) the Commission focused upon the right of Member States to check the identity of citizens crossing borders. However, the central point of my question concerned the manner in which citizens are treated when these checks are carried out. In the case described, was it prudent of the French authorities not to have women officers on duty at an international port to deal with situations involving women?

Does the Commission therefore agree that the French authority's mismanagement of an otherwise easily resolvable situation, i.e. its failure to provide a woman officer, exacerbated the problem unnecessarily and resulted in the woman's expulsion from France? Does not the Commission agree that this is unacceptable and that, in order to safeguard the dignity of women in such situations, in line with the Union's general policies on non-discrimination, women officers should be on duty at all times at major points of entry into the Union and transit between Member States?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(11 March 1999)

The Commission shares the honourable Member's opinion on the importance of respecting the dignity of women, including during identity checks when crossing borders.

However, with the exception of the case mentioned in Written Question 2892/98, the Commission is not aware of any problems relating to the rights and dignity of women that may arise when citizens are checked at Community borders.

The Commission therefore believes that there is no reason to take specific measures concerning this matter.

(1) OJ C 118, 29.4.1999, p. 161.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3938/98

by Carlos Robles Piquer (PPE) to the Commission

(4 January 1999)

Subject: Immediate prospects for the long-term nuclear fusion project

The US Department of Energy's decision to withdraw its researchers from foreign centres involved in the current ITER project presents the other partners - the EU, Japan and Russia - with difficult decisions.

According to information published recently, Europe has decided to continue for a few years without increasing its funding.

Furthermore, the loss of confidence in the long-term viability of the tokamak option (ITER) is renewing interest in other options such as stellarator-type reactors.

Can the Commission say what its intentions are in this area and what the Japanese and Russian positions are? Also, can it provide information about the EU's budget line earmarked for this purpose for the duration of the Fifth Framework Programme? Finally, will the justification for this line remain unchanged following the US decision?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(10 February 1999)

While the Community (according to the fifth framework programme) as well as Japan and Russia maintain a reactor -oriented approach pursuing a long-term energy and environmental strategy, the United States department of energy fusion programme has shrunk to a purely science-oriented programme. It may be noted that this is the result of a budget decreased by two thirds over the past 15 years.

The substantial database and know-how on magnetic confinement resulting from both the ITER EDA (Engineering design activities) and the research world-wide on Tokamak and concepts akin to it - such as Stellarators - lead to increasing confidence in the relevance of the reduced-mission/costs experimental reactor option presently under design in the framework of the reduced-scope three year extension of the ITER EDA agreement.

Overall, the completion of the United States withdrawal from ITER by July 1999 will not cause increased costs for the continuing three parties.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2529/98

by Graham Mather (PPE) to the Commission

(1 September 1998)

Subject: Private imports of American cars to the UK

Article 30 of the Treaty of Rome states that "Quantitative restrictions on imports and all measures having equivalent effect shall, without prejudice to the following provision, be prohibited between Member States."

Many owners of American care in the UK believe that this right is being curtailed in their case. They have complained that under the single vehicle approval scheme, the application of type approval standards prevents the free movement of American vehicles between Member States. Furthermore, they contend that mutual recognition provisions are impracticable for those wishing to import a single vehicle and that, in any case, UK officials are not respecting these provisions.

1. Is the Commission aware of this situation?

2. Is the Commission taking any action to investigate this matter and to ensure the free passage of American cars which comply with EU rules on noise and emissions between Member States?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(11 December 1998)

Whenever the Commission receives a complaint backed up by evidence concerning a possible infringement of Community law by a Member State, it conducts an investigation. As regards the registration of motor vehicles, it acts in accordance with its interpretative communication on procedures for the type-approval and registration of vehicles previously registered in another Member State(1).

The Commission has received complaints about UK regulations on single vehicle approval which suggest that they may contravene Articles 30 and 36 of the EC Treaty.

It is currently liaising with the UK authorities with a view to clarifying the exact scope of the regulations in question and ascertaining to what extent they are justified.

(1) OJ C 143, 15.5.1996.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3285/98

by Marialiese Flemming (PPE) to the Council

(10 November 1998)

Subject: The Council's efforts to achieve uniform safety standards for nuclear power stations in the European Union

In 1975(1) and 1992(2) the Council of Ministers adopted resolutions on the "technological problems of nuclear safety". They call for the progressive harmonisation of safety requirements and criteria in order to provide an equivalent and satisfactory degree of protection of the population and the environment against the risks of radiation resulting from nuclear activities. As the Euratom Treaty does not contain any pertinent provisions, this resolution is particularly important.

What uniform safety standards has it so far been possible to introduce under these resolutions? What action is the Council taking to encourage the future establishment of uniform safety standards? Are there plans for the Council to adopt further resolutions on this subject?

Reply

(29 March 1999)

1. The Council attaches very great importance to nuclear safety, hence its adoption of the two Resolutions to which the Honourable Member refers, and the close attention it is giving to their implementation by the Commission, the Member States and the industries.

The Council recalls that competence and responsibility for the safe design, construction and operation of a nuclear installation rests with the Member State having jurisdiction over such an installation and recalls the complementary acquis communautaire in the field of nuclear safety based on the EAEC Treaty, in particular Chapter III (health and safety).

2. In its report of 13 December 1993 entitled "Towards a system of safety criteria and requirements recognised throughout the Community and a genuine safety culture throughout Europe"(3), which was also sent to the European Parliament, the Commission gave a precise account of the situation concerning the implementation of the two Resolutions.

The Council will of course examine any further report that the Commission sees fit to present on this subject.

3. Recently, on 7 December 1998, the Council adopted a Decision approving the accession of the European Atomic Energy Community to the Nuclear Safety Convention.

The aim of the Convention is to achieve and maintain a high level of nuclear safety worldwide through national measures and international cooperation, and to establish effective defences in nuclear installations against potential radiological hazards in order to protect individuals, society and the environment from harmful effects of ionizing radiation from such installations.

4. On 7 December 1998 the Council also adopted conclusions on nuclear safety in the context of the enlargement of the European Union, with the purpose of ensuring that a high level of nuclear safety continues to be given priority in the accession process, including by helping the applicant countries to ensure that technological and operational safety levels are aligned with current prevailing practice in the Union.

(1) OJ C 185, 14.8.1975, p. 1.

(2) OJ C 172, 8.7.1992, p. 2.

(3) COM(93) 649 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-3174/98

by Michel Scarbonchi (ARE) to the Commission

(12 October 1998)

Subject: The European Union's cooperation with Congo-Brazzaville

Can the Commission provide full details of the European Union's cooperation with Congo-Brazzaville since 1994 through both the EDF and the Community budget? In addition, what conditions govern the European Union's cooperation with this country under the Lomé Convention?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission

(6 November 1998)

The European Union¢s cooperation with Congo (Brazzaville) had to be suspended for security reasons during the civil war. The Union stated its position on the civil war and the new regime in its statement of 3 November 1997 in which it pointed out that resumption of cooperation would depend on progress in national reconciliation and the legitimisation of the authorities.

Since then progress has been made through the formation of a Government of National Unity, the organisation of a national forum for unity, democracy and reconstruction and agreement on a transitional period of three years at the end of which presidential and parliamentary elections are to be held in 2000 and the setting up of a National Council to function as the country's legislative body during the transitional period.

The Community has provided approximately ECU 12 million in humanitarian aid and the Commission plans to provide a further ECU 1,2 million by the end of the year. In the light of the progress made in national reconciliation and democratisation, the Commission has authorised the resumption of most of the seventh European Development Fund (EDF) projects, giving priority to those which directly benefit victims of the fighting and provide for rehabilitation needs. Programming under the eighth EDF can be considered once Congo priorities and sectoral policies have been defined.

Funds committed to Congo as part of Community cooperation from 1994 to 1998 total approximately ECU 54,8 million, ECU 40,6 million under national (ECU 39,1 million) and regional (ECU 1,5 million) indicative programmes, ECU 12 million as humanitarian aid and ECU 2,2 million under the Community budget. A full account of commitments made is being sent directly to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.