ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1422/97 by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission (23 April 1997)

Subject: Methane

Have any projects been undertaken, or are any projects planned, to reduce leakages from gas pipes and natural gas fields in Eastern Europe and if so will the Commission please provide details of the projects and their achievements or expected results?

Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (22 May 1997)

A TACIS funded study has been carried out and resulted in specific recommendations for follow-up actions to improve operations and reduce losses of methane in Russia's gas transport system. This study was followed by a major commercial agreement to rehabilitate the Russian export pipelines to Europe.

The PHARE programme has financed studies and projects on the refurbishment and development of the Central and East European gas system. A gas interconnection study was finalised in 1995 on the overall investment requirements in the Central and East European gas sector. A regional Baltic gas study, covering the three Baltic

republics, includes a major section on engineering developments and recommendations with regard to reducing the risks of major leaks or pipeline ruptures, increasing safety and security of the system. The report includes a prioritised list of measures and investments to undertake in order to fulfil the recommendations of the study.

In addition, assistance is given by way of other non-Community programmes and also by the international financial institutions, in particular the European bank for reconstruction and development (EBRD). West European gas companies are also supporting and closely co-operating with the gas industry of the Commonwealth of independent states (CIS) and Central and Eastern Europe on the upgrading and improvement of their gas grids. This co-operation includes direct investments in the gas sector of these countries, transfer of know-how and technology.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1028/97 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission (19 March 1997)

Subject: Legal basis for the marketing of genetically modified products

The marketing of genetically produced or modified food products is regulated by Directive 90/220/EEC ((OJ L 117, 8.5.1990, p. 15. )) and European Parliament and Council Regulation 258/97 ((OJ L 43, 14.2.1997, p. 1. )) concerning novel foods and novel food ingredients (the 'novel food regulation').

1. What rules govern the marketing of transgenic plants which are used as animal feedingstuffs and hence indirectly enter the human food chain?

2. a) How is the marketing of transgenic plants which are used directly for human consumption and also for animal feedingstuffs and the production of renewable raw materials regulated?

b) Is there only one procedure for this or more than one?

c) How do these procedures relate to each other?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (30 May 1997)

1. In the absence of specific product legislation applicable to the placing on the market of feedingstuffs derived through modern biotechnology, Directive 90/220/EEC on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) remains the legislation applicable to the placing on the market of feedingstuffs containing or consisting of GMOs. Under this Directive, scientific assessment takes into account any risks to human health and the environment resulting from the release of the GMO in question.

The Commission is currently preparing a proposal for introducing legislation on specific feed materials which would apply, inter alia, to feedingstuffs produced through modern biotechnology.

2. Regulation (EC) No 258/97 on novel foods and novel food ingredients applies to the placing on the market of foods and food ingredients containing, consisting of, or derived from genetically modified organisms.

In line with the above described situation, GMOs which are to be placed on the market both as foods or food ingredients and as feedingstuffs (or for other uses not covered by product legislation, such as the production of renewable raw materials), have to undergo the authorisation procedures of both Regulation (EC) No 258/97 and Directive 90/220/EEC.

The two procedures will be implemented according to the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 258/97 and of Directive 90/220/EEC, respectively. For example, Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 258/97 lays down that Articles 11 to 18 of Directive 90/220/EEC will not apply to foods or food ingredients which consist of genetically modified organisms, since, as also laid down by the same article, the decision under the Regulation (EC) No 258/97 should respect the environmental safety requirements of Directive 90/220/EEC. In any case, the Commission will take all necessary action in order to ensure the smooth running of both procedures, which are based on an evaluation of any risk to human health and the environment resulting from the products in question.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1397/97 by Olivier Dupuis (ARE) to the Commission (22 April 1997)

Subject: UN Decade for the World's Indigenous People

In the light of the UN Decade for the World's Indigenous People, whose first quarter has almost passed, can the Commission indicate the projects through which it has supported the indigenous peoples of Wallis and Futuna in 1995 and 1996?

Can the Commission list the names of the projects and the amounts of financial support it has given for all the different financial instruments it has at its disposition to support the indigenous peoples of Wallis and Futuna?

Does the Commission feel that it has adequately reacted to the resolutions of the UN General Assembly which has called upon states and intergovernmental organizations to promote the rights and interests of the indigenous people living in their territories, as reflected by the title of the Decade: 'Indigenous People: Partners in Action'?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission (30 May 1997)

The Commission does not pursue a policy of solely targetting the indigenous peoples of Wallis and Futuna in its programmmes. It takes the view that the population in general should benefit from the development process. Through the 6th and 7th indicative programmes it provides financial aid amounting to 8.4 MECU in support of the government's policies of rural development and economic diversification. 34% of this aid is allocated to current projects in the sectors of agriculture and economic infrastructure of the type which will improve the socio-economic status of indigenous peoples. A list of these projects is forwarded direct to the Honourable Member and to the Secretariat general of the Parliament. Consequently, the Commission feels that it has reacted adequately to the resolutions of the United Nations general assembly.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0999/97 by Miguel Arias Cañete (PPE) to the Commission (19 March 1997)

Subject: Farmers in Italy

Will the Commission say how many farmers there are in Italy and how many people are directly employed in agriculture in that country at the present time?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0989/97, E-0990/97, E-0991/97, E-0992/97, E-0993/97, E-0994/97, E-0995/97, E-0996/97, E-0997/97, E-0998/97, E-0999/97, E-1000/97, E-1001/97, E-1002/97 and E-1003/97 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (2 May 1997)

Survey on the structure of farms

>TABLE>

Source: Eurostat.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0800/97 by Jean-Yves Le Gallou (NI) to the Commission (10 March 1997)

Subject: Community subsidies to associations, NGOs and various other bodies

With regard to heading B3-300 (General information and communications work), can the Commission provide a complete list of associations and other bodies benefiting from Community subsidies and the exact amount of these subsidies for the last completed budgetary year, i.e. 1996?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (12 May 1997)

The Commission is sending direct to the Honourable Member and to the Parliament's Secretariat, a complete list of associations and other bodies which benefitted from Community subsidies in the 1996 budgetary year under the heading B3-300 (general information and communications work). The list gives the amount, in ECU, of each subsidy, as well as the name and address of each recipient.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1411/97 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission (22 April 1997)

Subject: Ostiense-Valco San Paolo urban project in Rome

In October 1996, the Planning authority of the Municipality of Rome developed an urban project entitled Ostiense - Valco San Paolo.

The plan envisages, among other things, demolition of a number of old papal buildings dating back to the time of Pope Pius IX, the construction of skyscrapers, shopping centres and a waste site.

All this would take place in a densely populated area, between the via dei Papareschi and the River Tiber, on ground where numerous tombs from the Roman period are to be found.

The Municipality did not consult the inhabitants of the area in connection with an environmental impact assessment of the project, which would, however, appear to be significant, enough to worry the inhabitants in particular.

1. Does the conduct of the Municipality of Rome in this situation constitute an infringement of Directives 97/11/EC ((OJ L 73, 14.3.1997, p. 5. )) and 85/337/EEC ((OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40. )) on the environmental impact assessment?

2. If Community law has been infringed, will the Commission take appropriate steps?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (21 May 1997)

The project the Honourable Member is referring to is of a type listed in Annex II to Directive 85/337/EEC ((OJ L 175, 5.7.1985. )) on environmental impact assessment.

The impact assessment procedure is not systematically applicable to all such projects.

Nonetheless, the competent authorities must take account of the principle set out in Article 2 of the Directive that any project likely to have significant effects on the environment by virtue, inter alia, of its nature, size or location must be made subject to an environmental impact assessment.

Member States must also consider each category of project listed in Annex II to the Directive and establish whether impact assessment is necessary.

The Commission will approach the Italian authorities regarding the matters raised by the Honourable Member.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1271/97 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission (11 April 1997)

Subject: Project for the construction of line 'C' for the Rome underground

In her answer to Written Question E-1508/96 ((OJ C 356, 25.11.1996, p. 48. )) Mrs Bjerregaard stated, on behalf of the Commission, that it might be possible for the Commission to intervene directly with the Italian authorities with regard to the project for line 'C' for the Rome Underground.

The question pointed out the failure on the part of Rome city council to apply the procedure laid down in Directive 85/337/EEC ((OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40. )) for environmental impact assessment in connection with this project.

Can the Commission specify what kind of intervention was envisaged vis-à-vis the Italian authorities?

Finally, can it say whether steps have actually been or are being taken to this end?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (6 May 1997)

The Commission has approached the Italian authorities, presented the information reported by the Honourable Member and asked for comments.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0878/97 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (12 March 1997)

Subject: Trade and the environment

In connection with 'International trade and the environment' (CES 1264/96), the eco-label (ecological quality mark) scheme based on the life-cycle of products raises a specific problem. Opinions differ as to whether the eco-label schemes really come within the scope of the provisions of the agreement on technical barriers to trade, in that these labelling programmes are voluntary. Another problem is that opinions differ in the various Member States as to how to determine the environmental requirements and in particular those of the eco-label systems. In view of the ambiguities referred to above and the possible adverse effects they may have on trade, could the Commission define a series of requirements which must be fulfilled for the awarding of ecological trademarks? It would also be advisable to draw up an international agreement on the conditions required as regards transparency.

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (30 April 1997)

Eco-labelling is a market-based instrument to promote environmental objectives by means of empowering consumers to make environmental choices when purchasing and providing incentives for industry to produce environmentally friendly goods and services.

The Community eco-label programme has a distinctive voluntary nature. Accordingly, foreign and Community producers may sell products within the Community markets without the eco-label. The findings of a recent Organization for economic co-operation and development (OECD) study confirm the limited trade impacts of voluntary eco-labelling schemes.

According to the framework established by Council Regulation (EEC) No 880/92 of 23 March 1992 on a Community eco-label award scheme ((OJ L 99, 11.4.1992. )), the Commission has already defined a series of requirements which must be fulfilled for the development of the ecological criteria and the awarding of the label. According to Articles 1 and 5 (4) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 880/92, the eco-label scheme is based on a 'cradle-to grave approach.' The methodology used to study the environmental impact of product groups is life cycle assessment (LCA).

In addition, the Commission is of the view that voluntary eco-labelling schemes based on a LCA approach, such as the Community scheme, are not covered in their entirety by the technical barniers to trade (TBT) Agreement.

Full transparency of the system is ensured by the participation of the different interest groups (industry, commerce, trade unions, consumers, environmentalists) in the eco-label Consultation Forum (Article 6 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 880/92). The Community has made specific proposals in the World trade organization (WTO) committee on trade and environment, including the elaboration of an ad hoc code of conduct, to ensure transparency in the elaboration and operation of eco-labelling schemes, while at the same time protecting the integrity of the LCA approach.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1418/97 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission (23 April 1997)

Subject: Agreement between the Commission and the illegal Turkish-Cypriot university

It was reported on 13.12.1996 that the Commission had concluded an agreement (in the form of exchange of letters) with the so-called 'University of the Eastern Mediterranean' which is located in the occupied part of Cyprus and is an illegal body set up by a 'law' promulgated by the puppet state headed by Mr Denktash.

This agreement makes provision for continuous cooperation between the illegal 'university' (through an 'information centre') and the Commission and for monthly dispatches of information material to the centre.

This agreement is clearly illegal, since the Commission is not endowed with a legal personality and can assume obligations only on behalf of the Community (and only on condition that it is empowered to do so', while the 'university' in question is completely illegal.

Can the Commission explain its official position on this extremely serious matter since it appears to be granting a degree of recognition to the puppet regime of Mr Denktash, something which is clearly not intended by the European Union?

Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (21 May 1997)

The Commission has decided to extend its support to a European information centre set up at the University of the Eastern Mediterranean, Famagusta. Its tasks will include receiving and disseminating all relevant documentation on the institutions, policies and laws of the Community.

The decision was covered by the mandate of 6 March 1995 given to the Commission by the Council to inform the Turkish-Cypriot community of the advantages of joining the Community. In compliance with that mandate the Government of Cyprus was duly consulted by the Commission.

The Commission has made clear on several occasions that its decision in no way constitutes legal recognition of the de facto situation in the north of Cyprus and does not run counter to the consistent policy of the Community of recognizing only the Government of Cyprus.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1214/97 by Gary Titley (PSE) to the Commission (26 March 1997)

Subject: Taxation of cars belonging to citizens moving between Member States

Can the Commission explain the rules on taxation of cars belonging to nationals of one Member State who buy their vehicle in one country but then use it in another EU state?

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

The matter of the movement of cars within the single market has to be looked at in the light of the principles set out in Council Directive 83/182/EEC of 28 March 1983, which introduced a system of tax exemptions ((OJ L 105, 23.4.1983. )).

This system is based on the principle that individuals who have their 'normal residence' in a Member State may use a car in another Member State provided that they satisfy the conditions provided for in the Directive, including a period, whether or not continuous, of not more than six months in any twelve months in the case of private use.

Article 7 of the Directive gives a definition of 'normal residence' which takes account of personal and occupational ties and in which no reference is made to the criterion of nationality.

As a rule, persons having their 'normal residence' in a particular Member State may use in that Member State only cars registered there, irrespective of whether they are the owners of the cars in question.

In the specific case where a new car is purchased with a view to being registered in a Member State other than the Member State of purchase, value added tax (VAT) has to be paid in the Member State of registration even if the vehicle has been purchased in another Member State (Article 28a(1) and (2) of the Sixth VAT Directive - 77/388/EEC ((OJ L 145, 13.6.1977. ))).

Should the Honourable Member have a particular case in mind, the Commission is prepared to examine it since problems of implementation may arise, particularly where determination of the user's place of 'normal residence' is concerned.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0897/97 by Johanna Maij-Weggen (PPE) to the Commission (12 March 1997)

Subject: Acts of terrorism by Muslims against Christians in Pakistan

Is the Commission aware of the events which took place in the week of 14 February 1997 in the predominantly Christian town of Shanti Nagar in Pakistan and five neighbouring villages, when property belonging to Christians, including many houses, was destroyed and one person was killed and several wounded?

Is the Commission prepared to ask the Government of Pakistan for clarification regarding these acts of terrorism and to call on it to protect the Christian minorities in Pakistan where necessary?

Answer given by Mr Marin on behalf of the Commission (14 April 1997)

The Commission, which, together with the Member States, follows all matters pertaining to the respect for human rights in Pakistan, is aware of the events to which the Honourable Member refers.

The matter of an appropriate response by the Community was discussed by the heads of mission in Islamabad shortly after these events took place. At that time it was decided that verifications as to the precise nature and circumstances of what occured should firstly be sought from reliable third parties and that, additionally, a fact-finding mission by Community diplomats should be considered before any direct approach was made to the Pakistani authorities. These verifications continue.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0558/97 by John McCartin (PPE) to the Commission (24 February 1997)

Subject: Fisheries task force

What progress has been made in setting up the task force within DG XIV that Commissioner Bonino undertook to set up? What remit has been given to it and is it to operate under any specific time scale?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (5 May 1997)

The Commission has already started its reflection on the review of the common fisheries policy for the year 2002.

The Commission intends to set up a working group involving all the possible actors of this process including the European institutions, the national and regional administrations, the fishing industry, the processing industry, the consumers and those involved in the protection of the environment.

In this way, the Commission aims at ensuring the broadest possible consultation on all aspects of the common fisheries policy.

This working group will embark on an open and bottom-up dialogue and with the help of a questionnaire submitted to the socio-economic partners, to be distributed by the Commission, conclusions and proposals will be made available from all those concerned by the review of the common fisheries policy.

Thus the working group will provide the Commission with the necessary feedback before it makes any formal proposals.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1215/97 by Wolfgang Kreissl-Dörfler (V) to the Commission (7 April 1997)

Subject: WTO action plan for the least developed countries

How will the Commission implement the WTO action plan for the least developed countries, particularly the sections on market access and the high-level meeting on technical cooperation?

Answer given by Sir Leon Brittan on behalf of the Commission (12 May 1997)

During the World trade organisation (WTO) ministerial conference in Singapore, the Commission and the Member States have actively pursued the question of the marginalisation of the least developed countries (LLDCs) in international trade and in the multilateral trading system. As a result, the ministerial declaration recognises the need for measures to be taken in favour of these countries and gives the basis for further progress.

A high level meeting, most probably by the end of June, will focus on an integrated approach on technical assistance. Preparatory work has already started in Geneva. The secretaries of the WTO, the United Nations conference on trade and development (UNCTAD) and International trade centre (ITC) are closely collaborating while the World bank and International monetary fund are also in the picture. The Commission is participating in the preparatory work, and seeking the establishment of a well-focused and balanced agenda that will ensure a successful outcome of the meeting. The high level meeting gives an opportunity for announcing initiatives for market access on condition that the whole operation does not become a negotiating forum.

The WTO action plan in favour of LLDCs gives a series of suggestions for further improvements on market access. The preferential access already given by the Community to the LLDCs could be improved through proposals that will be politically meaningful but also economically significant. The Commission considers that in order to ensure participation from other WTO members, the Community should take the lead within the committee on trade and development in Geneva.

Thus the Commission approved on 16 April 1997 a communication to the Council aiming to stem the marginalisation of the world's poorest countries from the benefits of the international trading system. The Commission suggests improving the access of LLDCs to exports in three steps. Firstly, trade preferences given to all LLDCs could be increased to match the best deal available under the Lomé Convention or the Generalised system of preferences (GSP), secondly, Community origin rules could be applied more flexibly and thirdly, all developed countries as well as the stronger developing countries should match these efforts. The strategy would build on initiatives agreed by WTO countries with strong Community support at their recent Singapore ministerial meeting.