ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0247/97 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Council (13 February 1997)

Subject: Transposition of the flora and fauna habitats directive into German law

1. How does the Council consider it can prevent further delays in the transposition of the flora and fauna habitats directive into German law?

2. Will the Council initiate proceedings for infringement of the Treaty against the Federal Republic of Germany?

3. What has been the Council's response to the complaints from the German environment and nature protection association and the Bienwald association?

4. Why has the Council not yet succeeded in suspending or breaking off the planning approval procedures for upgrading the B9 road to become the A65 through the Bienwald?

5. What other action does the Council plan to take to protect the Bienwald against the planned intervention?

Answer (16 May 1997)

It is the Commission's responsibility to ensure implementation of the provisions of the Treaties and of the provisions adopted by the institutions pursuant thereto and to initiate the appropriate proceedings if it considers it necessary.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0006/97 by Gerhard Botz (PSE) to the Commission (22 January 1997)

Subject: Commission's internal coordination with regard to support for renewable sources of energy

Mr Papoutsis, the Commissioner with responsibility for energy, recently presented a strategy paper in which the increase in the proportion of renewable energy sources from 6% to 12% by the year 2010 was put forward as a target for the EU. Biomass, wind, tidal and solar energy sources will continue in future to receive specific support in order to achieve the aim of reducing the EU's CO2 emissions.

At the same time Mr van Miert, the Commissioner for competition, is trying to dismantle the favourable terms for electricity from wind power which are contained in the German law on electricity production. In view of the above:

Has the Commission coordinated its activities in this sector?

Does its target of reducing CO2 emissions enjoy priority as a policy in the Commission?

Can developers and users of renewable sources of energy continue to rely on the EU's promises of support?

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission (2 April 1997)

Indeed reducing CO2 emissions is one of the Community's prime objectives. This is why it is supporting the Member States' efforts to protect the environment and is pursuing supplementary activities and programmes at Community level. However, those national and Community measures in support of renewable energy sources must obey Community law. Thus the Commission has, on several occasions, been caused to challenge national activities in favour of renewable energy sources where this has infringed Community law, more particularly in the areas of competition or agricultural policy. In order to give guidance to the Member States and economic operators, the Commission has published texts in the Official Journal ((OJ C 72, 10.3.94. )) concerning Community back-up for state aids for the protection of the environment.

It should be stated with regard to the German legislation mentioned by the Honourable Member that the Commission had not asked for the repeal of the existing provisions, which concerned the purchase price for energy from renewable sources (and not the tax incentives). In its letter the Commission had suggested that these be adapted to the technical/economic conditions currently applying in this area in order to avoid any suspicion that those provisions were an unjustified subsidy.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0871/97 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (12 March 1997)

Subject: Environment (LIFE)

With regard to budget heading B3-320: LIFE, a financial instrument for the environment - measures on Community territory, can the Commission say whether subsidies have been granted for Italy and, if so, for which organizations and for which activities?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0858/97, E-0859/97, E-0860/97, E-0861/97, E-0862/97, E-0863/97, E-0864/97, E-0865/97, E-0866/97, E-0867/97, E-0868/97, E-0869/97, E-0870/97 and E-0871/97 given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (25 April 1997)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0201/97 by Gianni Tamino (V) to the Commission (5 February 1997)

Subject: Use of Community funds for the conservation of protected areas in Sardinia, Italy

The region of Sardinia comes under Objective 1 of the Structural Funds to protect areas of high environmental and scenic value through the creation of nature-reserves under regional law No 31/89, the framework law which provides for the creation of a system of 9 regional parks, 59 nature reserves and 24 natural monuments, but so far none has been created. In 1996 some communes in Sardinia apparently requested funding for the MCP three-year (1996-1999) nature park system and earmarked it for various environmental protection projects such as roads and the creation of a museum (communes of Cabras, Scano Montiferro etc.)

Has the region of Sardinia, to which Structural Funds were granted, adopted law No 31/89? How many and which applications for Structural Fund Objective 1 aid have Sardinia and its communes submitted to the Commission? Is it possible to grant funds so closely linked to implementation of a law even if the law has not been adopted? How does the Commission plan to ascertain that EU funding for the creation of parks and protected areas in Sardinia has been used to implement regional law No 31/89?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (20 March 1997)

As mentioned in the Commission's reply to written question E-2323/96 by Mr. Ripa di Meana ((OJ C 72, 7.3.1997. )), the structural fund regional programme for Sardinia contains a measure to support natural parks in the region.

According to the information available to the Commission, regional law No. 31/89 has not been fully activated and consultations on its application continue in the region.

Individual applications for projects under structural fund programmes are not submitted to the Commission. The projects are selected by the implementing bodies on the basis of agreed criteria. The monitoring committee for the programme, on which the Commission is represented, is informed about the application of the criteria and the projects selected.

Although law 31/89 provides a general framework for the development of natural parks in Sardinia, the measure in the regional programme is not directly dependent on it. Some projects of limited dimension linked to the protection of the environment have been financed under the measure. According to the information available to the Commission, there is no conflict between the projects and the law.

The Commission will continue to monitor closely the implementation of the measure in the monitoring committee for the programme.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1175/97 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission (3 April 1997)

Subject: Nestlé factory and industrial transfers

In my Written Question No E-4050/96 ((OJ C 217, 17.7.1997, p. 48. )) I condemned the planned closure of the Nestlé factory at Abbiategrasso and asked the Commission to take steps to safeguard the production of goods which convey the image of Italian products and prevent an employment crisis which could otherwise seriously affect the whole region.

In his reply, Commissioner Van Miert alluded to strategic, industrial and economic reasons for transfers of production within the European Union and said that there was nothing to suggest that Nestlé had breached the Treaty.

However, since one of the main points of dispute in the trade union negotiations between management and workers at Nestlé has been the transfer abroad of the manufacture of typically Italian products such as cappuccino and Nesquik, will the Commission review the restructuring programme of Nestlé Italy, take all necessary measures to maintain employment in the region, undertake to ensure that typically Italian products continue to be manufactured at the Abbiategrasso factory and open proceedings against Nestlé for breach of the rules laid down in the EU Treaty?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission (29 April 1997)

The Commission would thank the Honourable Member for providing further information on the situation of the Nestlé factory at Abbiategrasso. She states that closure of the factory would lead to the transfer abroad of products made there.

In its reply to Written Question E-4050/96, the Commission informed the Honourable Member that it was not aware of any direct public support allegedly received by Nestlé in recent years for its industrial activities. The question now put by her does not add anything new on the matter.

In the absence of any evidence of public assistance, and in particular state aid, for Nestlé, the Commission does not believe that it can intervene in this strategic decision or ask Nestlé to submit a restructuring plan to it. Accordingly, it would serve no useful purpose to initiate proceedings under Article 93(2) of the EC Treaty.

As for the other aspects of the matter raised by the Honourable Member, the Commission has already set out its views in its answer to Written Question E-4050/96.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0957/97 by Gianni Tamino (V) to the Commission (13 March 1997)

Subject: Project on the detection of germ cell mutagens, STEP programme

In June 1993, the ENEA notified the relevant authorities, in accordance with the Italian legislation on animal experiments, that it was conducting experiments on 1 400 mice, over a period of 18 months, with Community funding, at the Casaccia-Roma CRE with a view to developing new methodologies to determine the genotoxic effects induced in the male germ line cell of mice as a result of treatment with mutagenic agents.

Is the Commission aware of these experiments? How much financial assistance was provided and what innovative results were obtained? Is the Commission aware that the experiments were conducted without using anaesthetics, without applying for permission not to use them as required by Italian law and without the laboratory having received the necessary authorization - on the date of the notification - from the Italian Ministry of Health? Has the funding granted to this laboratory been renewed?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0957/97 and E-0958/97 given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (24 April 1997)

The research to which the questions refer was undertaken in the framework of two shared-cost action Research & development (R& D) contracts Science and technology for environmental protection (STEP-CT910144 and STEP-CT910159). In the first of these, the Community contribution to European nuclear energy agency (ENEA) was ECU 117 000, representing 20% of the total costs of the work. In the second, the work was subcontracted to ENEA by the Italian Centro Nazionale di Ricerca which received ECU 44 000 from the Commission, representing 50% of the costs of its work. The Commission is aware of the work undertaken in both projects the

results of which have been published in the peer-reviewed scientific literature. Final synthesis reports were published in a special issue of the journal Mutation research in 1996 (volume 353, pages 65-84 and 11-46 respectively). No tests which required anaesthesia were conducted in the projects. The Commission has also been assured that the facility at Casaccia has been in operation since the early 1960's with a long tradition of implementation of the most advanced conditions for animal health and care.

The results of both projects contributed directly to the goals of the STEP research programme and indirectly to Commission policy on chemicals safety and assessment, in that they helped develop improved methodologies for chemicals safety assessment, leading to a better protection of man and the environment.

Both of the 36 month contracts started on 1 October 1991, four months before the Italian legislation (27 January 1992). The law and its procedures were clarified by the Italian government in a series of circulars during 1992-1994. During this period, the authorities were notified of the research and according to the law, the experiments were thenceforth permitted. The contracts terminated on 30 September 1994 and have not been renewed.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1010/97 by Marie-Arlette Carlotti (PSE) to the Commission (12 March 1997)

Subject: Decentralized cooperation in the context of the Euro-Mediterranean partnership

The renewed Mediterranean policy has made it possible to implement a series of programmes aimed at expanding decentralized cooperation (Med Campus, Med Urbe, Med Invest, etc.).

1. What assessment can be made of these programmes and of the networks for exchanging experience which have been set up? Have any documents been compiled on the successes and failures of this policy?

2. These programmes have been blocked for some time. Will it soon be possible to relaunch decentralized cooperation as part of Meda?

3. Will there be any specific action in the field of culture, which was absent from the previous Med programmes but played a central role at the Barcelona Conference?

Answer given by Mr Marin on behalf of the Commission (9 Avril 1997)

1 and 2. The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question No 459/97 by Mr Amadeo ((OJ C 217 of 17.7.1997, p. 194. )).

3. Culture has always played an important role in the programmes for decentralised co-operation in the Mediterranean region. Projects in the framework of the programmes for decentralised co-operation in the Mediterranean region have included themes such as cultural heritage, restoration of monuments, exchanges of theatre groups and music festivals. Culture will of course continue to play an important role in all future actions of decentralised co-operation in the Mediterranean region and will be an important theme at the second Euro-mediterranean conference of foreign ministers to be held in Malta mid-April.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0474/97 by Kenneth Collins (PSE) to the Commission (19 February 1997)

Subject: Nickel in Euro coins

Will the Commission confirm that it is taking all possible steps to ensure that the new Euro coins will pose no threat to public health by causing allergic reactions?

If so, will the Commission inform us of its efforts, particularly in relation to the prevention of nickel allergy?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0474/97 and E-0548/97 given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission (15 April 1997)

All the coin systems in the Member States include nickel in the composition of alloys used for the production of coins with the exception of Sweden. In certain cases an increase of allergic problems have been identified as resulting from permanent contact with coins containing nickel and these have given rise to concern.

The Commission examined very carefully the allergic reactions caused by nickel. The result of this examination led to a Directive (94/27/EC) ((OJ L 188, 22.7.1994. )) limiting the use of nickel in certain products. This Directive applies to objects which are in direct and permanent contact with the skin. Coins are not considered to fall under this category.

The current proposal of the mint directors already includes 4 coins (out of 8) which would be nickel free (1, 2, 5 and 50 cents). Following a demand by the Council, the mint directors are also examining the possibility of producing the 10 and 20 cents coins in a nickel free material (or alloy).

The Commission is furthermore preparing a proposal pursuant to Article 129 of the EC Treaty for a Parliament and Council decision for the adoption of a Community action programme on the prevention of pollution-related diseases. This proposal will seek to support activities aimed at preventing and reducing allergies.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1064/97 by Giulio Fantuzzi (PSE), Fiorella Ghilardotti (PSE) and Rinaldo Bontempi (PSE) to the Commission (21 March 1997)

Subject: Euro-Mediterranean association agreements and rice imports

The Commission plays a major role in drawing up agreements with third countries. Among these, the Euro-Mediterranean association agreements are particularly important. Agricultural products are a prominent feature of such agreements. Moreover, the agreement currently being drawn up with Egypt provides for a significant increase in the zero-duty quota (475 000 tonnes) in respect of rice.

1. Has the Commission assessed the overall impact which such concessions on agricultural imports are likely to have on the European market?

2. How does it view the zero-duty quota requested in respect of Egyptian rice?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (22 April 1997)

The Commission is fully aware of the difficult market situation in the rice sector.

The Commission is currently carrying out analyses of imports of agricultural products into the Community from Mediterranean third countries. These will form the basis for its study of the impact of its concessions on Community markets.

In the context of negotiations for a Euro-Mediterranean agreement, Egypt originally tabled requests on agriculture, including a duty-free tariff quota of 475 000 tonnes for rice, which the Commission and the Member States consider excessive. On rice, the Commission has proposed the maintenance of the current tariff quota volume of 32 000 tonnes, which was granted to Egypt in the cooperation agreement of 1977.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1165/97 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (26 March 1997)

Subject: Use of Leonardo funds to support training for firefighters

Is the Commission aware of any examples where Leonardo or other EU training funds have been made available to support training of firefighters? Would the Commission welcome such a proposal, given the unique contribution made by Fire Services towards the safety of European citizens?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (24 April 1997)

Currently one project is being supported for the training of firefighters (involving partners from 12 countries) and another to support the training of fire engineers (involving partners from 5 countries). The Commission looks favourably on all proposals submitted in the context of Leonardo which help to mobilise the resources of training organisations in different countries to develop innovative ways of improving the quality of training aimed at securing the safety and health of European citizens.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1004/97 by Ilona Graenitz (PSE) to the Commission (12 March 1997)

Subject: Manipulation of earmarks

There are at present 179 pigs in quarantine in Upper Austria. They are stated to have originated in Spain, although the Spanish authorities have forwarded no certificates to substantiate that claim, and the animals anyway have Netherlands earmarks. On examination, the presence of Aujeszky antibodies was established even although Upper Austria had been given 'additional guarantees' of freedom from Aujeszky's disease by the EU.

What monitoring arrangements are implemented in cases such as this where the transmission of animal diseases is possible?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (7 April 1997)

The Commission has, as yet, no knowledge of the specific case to which the Honourable Member refers. The situation described involves several infringements of Community rules.

The actions that can be taken by the receiving Member State are set out in Articles 8 and 9 of Council Directive 90/425/EEC ((OJ L 224, 18.8.1990. )) and depend on the seriousness of the case. They can range from isolating the animals until the situation is clarified, the return of the consignment to its origin, to the slaughter or destruction of the animals. The Directive also provides for consultations between the Member States involved and for the intensification of checks both in the Member State of origin and in the Member State of destination.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1496/97 by Pervenche Berès (PSE) to the Commission (30 April 1997)

Subject: Energy - comparative study

Can the Commission provide a comparative study of trends in the cost of the four energy sources (i.e. nuclear, coal, gas and water power) over the past 20 years and over the next 20 years?

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission (17 June 1997)

Prices and costs of energy sources depend, among other things, on their use. Prices are generally higher when smaller quantities are demanded, for instance in the domestic and tertiary sectors. Industrial energy consumers as well as power generators benefit in general from lower prices.

Statistical information on prices by energy sources are available from the publications of the Commission on gas and electricity prices, from the annual energy review, published by the Commission in Energy in Europe and the regular International energy agency (IEA) publication on energy prices and taxes.

In addition to fuel prices, energy costs also depend on the capital costs of the energy equipment and the respective efficiency rates, which vary according to fuel type and the age of the energy equipment.

While it is not specified by the Honourable Member at what level energy costs should be compared, the energy sources mentioned in the question (nuclear, coal, gas, hydro) suggest that a comparison should be undertaken at the level of electricity generation costs.

As regards the past 20 years, there are no official statistics on electricity generation costs by input fuel. However, there are studies by the International union of producers and distributors of electrical energy (Unipede), which give cost comparisons.

The issue of electricity generating costs on the basis of different input fuels (nuclear, coal, gas, hydro) can be investigated with energy models. On the basis of assumptions on the future development of prices for input fuels and of investment costs for new capacities, energy models such as MIDAS calculate electricity generation costs. The study 'European energy to 2020 - a scenario approach' published in spring 1996 in Energy in Europe is based on energy modelling with MIDAS.

Electricity generation leads also to external costs related to environmental emissions. The Externe project, supported by the JOULE programme, provides an evaluation of the externalities of fuel cycles related to electricity generation with separate volumes for each of the above-mentioned four fuels.