ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2685/97 by Sebastiano Musumeci (NI) to the Commission (1 September 1997)

Subject: Case of racism in Germany ignored by the authorities

Further to Question E-1239/97 ((OJ C 319, 18.10.1997, p. 244. )) on racism and the Commission's unsatisfactory answer,

1. what representations has the Commission made to the German Government to condemn the specific act of racism in question?

2. why has it not yet asked the German authorities to take appropriate action, when the European Union claims to promote the campaign against racism and xenophobia and the ideals relating thereto?

3. what measures does it intend to take to ensure that its answer is not seen merely as a list of platitudes?

4. with reference to the Council's joint action against racism, how does it intend to act whenever a Member State fails to guarantee the protection of fundamental rights and freedoms?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (16 October 1997)

1. and 2. As Community law stands at present the Commission cannot intercede with the national authorities in regard to a specific racist act.

Specific measures to counter violence, racism, xenophobia and antisemitism are a matter for each Member State, taking into account its constitutional rules and criminal law.

3. For its part the Commission attaches the greatest importance to the issue of racism, which runs counter to everything that Europe stands for. It deeply regrets any racist act in the Community.

4. The joint action against racism and xenophobia ((Common Action 96/443/IAI, OJ L 185, 24.7.1996. )) adopted by the Council on 15 July 1996 is designed to ensure effective judicial cooperation between the Member States, despite existing differences in national criminal law. Its implementation is a matter for the Member States and their authorities alone, and it is not for the Commission, given the powers it possesses at present, to take initiatives in this area.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3163/97 by Concepció Ferrer (PPE) to the Commission (13 October 1997)

Subject: Eurathlon programme

Last April the Commission announced that ECU 1.7 million would be made available for 174 projects under the Eurathlon sports programme. The projects selected involve an extremely wide range of activities from fencing to parachuting, although the most common activity of all is football.

In view of the fact that one of the aims of the Eurathlon sports programme is to promote exchanges between EU citizens and thus encourage the European spirit, could the Commission say how many of the projects adopted are intended to promote sport amongst persons with some kind of disability?

Could the Commission also say how many of the total number of projects submitted (657) were intended to promote sport amongst the disabled?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (6 November 1997)

Part of the Commission's sports budget is set aside for the Eurathlon programme while another part finances sports for the disabled.

As part of this specific sports programme for the disabled, in 1997, the Commission received 126 applications for grants, 72 of which will receive Commission aid from a provision totalling ECU 1 million.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3035/97 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (1 October 1997)

Subject: Charging of heavy goods vehicles

With reference to the Proposal for a Council directive on the charging of heavy goods vehicles for the use of certain infrastructures (COM(96) 331 final - 96/0182 SYN) ((OJ C 59, 26.2.1997, p. 9. )), whilst road tolls reflect the application of the principle of territoriality, combining them with vehicle taxes and excise duties results in dual taxation.

Will the Commission therefore bring about the abolition of these tolls in the long term? New technology, particularly electronic pricing, should make it possible to avoid dual taxation while at the same time improving the flow of traffic.

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission (7 November 1997)

The Commission considers the nature and objectives of fuel excise duties and vehicle taxes and of road tolls to be different. For this reason it does not accept the assertion that their simultaneous application constitutes double taxation.

Moreover, the Commission believes that road tolls, being directly linked to the costs caused by the vehicles when and where they are actually driven, are an appropriate charging instrument to use in pursuit of an efficient transport system. The application of advanced road using technology which allows payment without vehicles having to slow down or stop, and permits differentiation of rates that is related to underlying costs is expected to contribute further to the improvement of the transport system as a whole.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2978/97 by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE) to the Commission (15 September 1997)

Subject: Progress of CSF for Greece

The CSF for Greece has reached the half-way point of the period of application and is now at a critical stage. Will the Commission give details of the amounts and percentages of the funds earmarked for the CSF so far disbursed

1. in relation to the budget for the whole period of application (1994-1999)

2. in relation to the budget from the beginning of the period up to the present time (September 1997), and

3. in relation to the budget for 1997 alone (appropriations disbursed for the first 8 months of the year compared to the budget for the whole year),

both in global terms and with regard to the national and regional sections of the CSF and the Cohesion Fund?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (16 October 1997)

Payments from the Structural Funds for the Greek Community support framework (1994-97) until end August 1997 were as follows (ECU million):

>TABLE>

Payments from the Cohesion Fund are made in response to applications from the national authorities as the projects being financed progress. By mid-September 1997, the Commission had made payments to Greece totalling ECU 257 million.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2909/97 by Elly Plooij-van Gorsel (ELDR) to the Commission (17 September 1997)

Subject: Acceptance of Eurocheques in France

1. Is the Commission aware that no bank in France is any longer prepared to cash Eurocheques?

2. Does the Commission agree that the Eurocheque is a lawful means of payment in Europe on the basis of agreements between banks?

3. Does the Commission take the view that French banks are unilaterally infringing European banking agreements?

4. Can the Commission confirm that this action is distorting competition in banking transactions in Europe?

5. Does the Commission take the view that this action restricts the free movement of persons and regularly causes financial embarrassment to European citizens by preventing them from withdrawing cash or paying bills?

6. What action will the Commission take?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission (15 October 1997)

The legal arrangements governing the acceptance of international Eurocheques by French banks are purely contractual in nature. They are laid down in the Package-Deal Agreement on commissions, value dates, the centralised clearing of uniform Eurocheques drawn in local currency and the opening-up of the non-banking sector, which was notified to the Commission under Article 4 of Council Regulation No 17 of 6 February 1962, the First Regulation implementing Articles 85 and 86 of the Treaty ((OJ 13, 21.2.1962. )). The agreement does not require all the branches of a bank belonging to the international Eurocheque system to accept Eurocheques drawn by a bearer resident in a third country.

According to the information at the Commission's disposal, certain banks refuse to cash Eurocheques, but this is not true of all banks operating in France. The banks which refuse to cash Eurocheques appear to be acting unilaterally and not on the basis of an agreement or concerted practice, which are the only cases covered by Article 85 of the EC Treaty. Finally, it should be pointed out that paper Eurocheques are always accompanied by a cheque guarantee card, which also enables the holder to make cash withdrawals from cash dispensers. Almost all the cash dispensers in France accept Eurocheque cards.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3099/97 by Gary Titley (PSE) to the Commission (2 October 1997)

Subject: EU research and support for the jojoba and euphorbia tree species

In its answer to my question (P-2564/97 ((OJ C 76, 11.3.1998, p. 126. ))) concerning jojoba and euphorbia trees, the Commission stated that research had confirmed their potential as alternative agricultural crops in the Mediterranean.

Does the Commission intend coming forward with proposals to encourage the cultivation of these crops in areas where production of traditional crops is being cut due to overproduction?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (29 October 1997)

The Commission does not envisage measures to specifically encourage the cultivation of jojoba and euphorbia.

However, these crops are already eligible for the 'non-food' set-aside scheme, Commission Regulation (EC) No 1586/97 of 29 July 1997 laying down detailed implementing rules for the use of set-aside land for the provision of materials for the manufacture within the Community of products not primarily intended for human or animal consumption ((OJ L 215, 7.8.1997. )). This scheme allows farmers to use their set-aside land for the cultivation of crops for new non-food, non-feed outlets. The land on which these non-food crops are grown remains in most cases eligible for the set-aside premium.

In the field of structural policies, the guarantee section of the European agricultural guidance and guarantee fund (EAGGF), Council Regulation (EEC) No 2085/93 ((OJ L 193, 31.7.1993. )) also offers possibilities to encourage the development of alternative agricultural crops.

Many of the Mediterranean regions fall within the objective 1 regions or objective 5b zones for which operational programmes have been approved. These programmes may contain measures, which are to be developed by the regions, which could be used specifically to encourage the development of alternative crops such as jojoba and euphorbia.

Lastly, the horizontal structural measures (objective 5a) allow Member States to improve the processing and marketing of agricultural products through investment aid within the framework of Council Regulation (EC) No 951/97 of 20 May 1997 on improving the processing and marketing conditions for agricultural products ((OJ L 142, 2.6.1997. )). This scheme allows investments in relation to the processing and marketing of alternative crops in conformity with the selection criteria, established in Commission Decision 94/173/EC of 22 March 1994 on the selection criteria to be adopted for investments for improving the processing and marketing conditions for agricultural and forestry products and repealing Decision 90/342/EEC ((OJ L 79, 23.3.1994. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3205/97 by Freddy Blak (PSE) to the Commission (16 October 1997)

Subject: Working environment of homeworkers

1. A study by the Danish Ministry for Research concludes that the number of homeworkers will explode in the next three to five years. How does the Commission expect the number of those working at home in the European Union to increase in the next few years?

2. Is the Commission aware that many working environment directives that should protect workers simply have no effect in the home since they assume that the work is carried out in more traditional workplaces?

3. What will the Commission do to guarantee homeworkers in Europe just as good a working environment in the home as they would have in traditional workplaces?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (24 November 1997)

The Commission is aware that the number of homeworkers in Europe is on the increase. According to the Commission's figures for 1992, 6.9 million people in the Community usually perform their work at home. This is equivalent to 4.9% of the working population. The Commission is not in a position to estimate the extent to which the number of homeworkers is going to increase in the next few years.

The Commission recognised in its medium term social action programme (1995-1997) ((COM(95) 134 final. )), the need to strive at European level to improve the working conditions of homeworkers. In the meantime, a convention and a recommendation on homeworkers were adopted by the International labour organisation (ILO) on 20 June 1996. The convention offers a high level of protection for homeworkers. However, in order to ensure it is applied in the territory of the whole Community, it should be ratified by all Member States. The Commission is currently evaluating various possible courses of action.

In terms of protection, the ILO convention sets out the obligations imposed upon Member States to implement a policy on homeworking aimed at improving the situation of homeworkers. Moreover, the convention expressly states that the national policies on homework should promote, as far as possible, equality of treatment between homeworkers and other wage earners, thus guaranteeing homeworkers in the Community a working environment equivalent to that in traditional workplaces.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3359/97 by Brian Crowley (UPE) to the Commission (22 October 1997)

Subject: Representation of sectoral organizations

Given the Commission's statement in its Communication concerning the Development of the Social Dialogue at Community level that 'it will take account of special circumstances in the representation of social partners including the problem of certain sectoral organizations who are not members of specific Joint Committees' ((Commission communication concerning the Development of the Social Dialogue at Community level, COM(96) 448 final, paragraph 40. )), could the Commission report as to the reasons why European organizations representing flight crew, like the European Cockpit Association, who are an important sectoral organization, are not represented as social partners at European Union level and what steps, if any, have been taken to rectify this situation?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (1 December 1997)

The European cockpit association (ECA) plays an active role in the social dialogue at European level. It is fully informed of all developments regarding Community social policy at cross sectoral and sectoral level. ECA also takes part actively in the sectoral social dialogue. It is invited to the plenary session of the joint committee on civil aviation. Moreover, ECA is an active participant in the flight time limitation discussions at European level which aim to establish maximum duty periods for reasons of operational safety.

The Commission will shortly present a communication to the Council and the Parliament on the future of the social dialogue. It is the result of a comprehensive consultation exercise, initiated through the 1996 communication mentioned by the Honourable Member. The Parliament has contributed greatly to that exercise by its in-depth analysis of the future of the social dialogue in its resolution of 18 July 1997, supporting the Commission in its call for a strengthened sectoral dialogue.

In order to achieve this, the Commission intends to propose adaptations to the current structures of the sectoral dialogue. The social partners should be encouraged to work within flexible and adaptable structures which favour efficient political dialogue.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2574/97 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission (24 July 1997)

Subject: Contemptuous and dangerous decisions by the new Turkish Government

The Turkish Minister for Agriculture has officially stated that the area of opium cultivation in Turkey will increase from the present area of 300 000 ha. to 700 000 ha.: the new cultivation sites will be near the towns of Eskisehir and Manisa.

In addition to this inflammatory decision, the new Turkish Government, in the person of Vice-President Ecevit, has announced that the government has decided to lift restrictions on transfrontier trade - a measure that concerns primarily trade between Turkey and Iraq and is in flagrant violation of all the relevant UN resolutions.

Will the Commission say how it intends to react to these actions by the official Turkish authorities which show contempt for resolutions of organisations such as the UN, ignore appeals by governments, including the US administration which has repeatedly called for the cultivation of opium to be halted, and show indifference towards the deaths of hundreds of young Europeans every year from drug abuse?

Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (31 October 1997)

Turkey is one of the countries given permission by the United Nations to grow opium.

The Turkish authorities intend to increase the area under opium to 80 000 hectares in 1998 - not to 700 000 hectares as stated by the Honourable Member.

As it is obliged to, Turkey (Ministry of Foreign Affairs) on 14 July instructed its representative to the United Nations, in Vienna, to inform the United Nations Drug Control Programme of the area to be used for growing opium in 1998.

The Turkish authorities have, furthermore, informed the Commission that trade between Turkey and Iraq complies with the limits under the United Nations' embargo on Iraq and that no contrary decision has been reached.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-3809/97 by Raymonde Dury (PSE) to the Commission (19 November 1997)

Subject: Presence of MEPs at public events subsidised by the Commission

Can the Commission state, for each DG and for its Belgium office in Brussels, how many colloquies, seminars, study days or public conferences it subsidised in 1997?

Can it say at how many of these events one or more Belgian members were invited to put the European Parliament's point of view?

Does it not think it would be useful to use this funding to stimulate more widespread information, a wider debate and a greater presence by Members of the European Parliament?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (12 December 1997)

A detailed reply to the Honourable Member's questions would require lengthy and difficult research which the Commission is not in a position to undertake at the present time.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2890/97 by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission (17 September 1997)

Subject: Importation of Bombay duck

Can the Commission confirm the veracity of reports that it has banned the import of Bombay Duck into the European Union from a number of third countries?

What steps are being taken to ensure that this situation does not continue?

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

Recent inspection visits by Community inspection teams have demonstrated that there is a general problem with regard to the hygienic production and processing of fishery products in India and in Bangladesh. As defined by Council Directive 91/493/EEC, laying down the health conditions for the production and the placing on the market of fishery products ((OJ L 268, 24.9.1991. )) fishery products means all seawater or freshwater animals or parts thereof, including their roes, excluding aquatic mammals, frogs and aquatic animals covered by other Community acts. Therefore, Bombay Duck which is a dried fish specialty should be included in the scope of this definition.

The inspections have shown serious deficiencies in the structure of the establishments, in the hygienic quality of the raw material and in the processing operation. Furthermore a very important lack of control by the national authorities was revealed.

In addition to the above findings several Member States have discovered, during the import inspection procedures, the presence of salmonellae and vibrio in fish products originating in India. This contamination results from poor hygienic practices during production or processing.

As a measure to safeguard human health, the importation of fishery products originating in India and in Bangladesh was banned by Commission Decisions 97/515/EC and 97/513/EC, concerning certain protective measures with regard to certain fishery products originating in India ((OJ L 214, 6.8.1997. )). The measures will be reviewed before 30 November 1997.

The matter is very sensitive, involving public health concerns. The Commission is in contact with the authorities of India and Bangladesh to get the assurance that the sanitary conditions will be improved as soon as possible, in order to remove the import restrictions when satisfactory assurances are given about the sanitary situation.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3156/97 by Esko Seppänen (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (13 October 1997)

Subject: Inadequacy of EU environmental standards; final destination of untreated waste water from EU buildings

The EU's environmental standards are inadequate. It is intolerable that the waste water of the city of Brussels, for example, can flow untreated into the river and thence into the sea.

Is the Commission aware of these problems and does it plan any measures to reduce the polluting effect on the North Sea of, inter alia, the waste water from EU buildings?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (13 November 1997)

Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning urban waste-water treatment ((OJ L 135, 30.5.1991. )) requires Member States to introduce a system of collection and treatment of urban waste water in all agglomerations with a population equivalent (p.e.) of more than 2 000 (the population equivalent is a unit of measurement frequently used to measure the level of pollution in waste water; it is the organic load from any one person in a day). The final date for introducing these facilities is 31 December 1998, 31 December 2000 or 31 December 2005, depending on the size of the agglomeration and the sensitivity of the aquatic environment into which the waste water is discharged after treatment.

Regarding the Brussels agglomeration, the Belgian authorities have identified the River Senne, into which the agglomeration's waste water is discharged, as a sensitive zone within the meaning of the Directive. This means that this waste water must undergo, at the latest by 31 December 1998, secondary (i.e. biological) treatment as well as further nitrogen and phosphorus treatment before being discharged into the Senne.

Two waste water treatment plants, situated in the North and South of Brussels respectively, are planned in order to meet the requirements laid down in Directive 91/271/EEC.

In its capacity as guardian of the Treaty, the Commission ensures that Community legislation in this area is implemented, in Brussels as in all other agglomerations in the Community.