ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0879/98

by David Hallam (PSE) to the Commission

(11 March 1998)

Subject: Proposed United States Department of Agriculture Standards for Organic Produce

Is the Commission aware that the United States Department of Agriculture has released a 600 - page document setting out its standard for organic agriculture?

Could the Commission confirm that the United States Department of Agriculture's proposal would classify the following practices as "organic":

- Genetically-engineered crops?

- Intensive animal husbandry?

- Routine use of antibiotics?

- Irradiation of food?

- Use of chemicals unacceptable under European organic standards?

- Liberal use of non-organic ingredients in processed organic food?

Will the Commission contact the USDA and indicate that these standards fall far short of European definitions of what is "organic", that the introduction of such standards would cause enormous confusion for the consumer and that this could have an adverse impact on the reputation of organic products and damage most of Europe's small specialist organic farmers?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(24 April 1998)

The Commission would like first to refer to its answer to written question E-0325/98 by Mr Gahrton(1).

The Commission is currently studying in detail the proposed American regulations in view of its comments under the World trade organisation (WTO) agreement on technical barriers to trade. In the framework of this examination the Commission noted already that on certain issues such as the use of genetically modified organisms, irradiation, use of certain fertilizers and plant protection products, and incorporation of ingredients from conventional agriculture in composed foodstuffs, the proposed American regulations seem to be less stringent than the provisions of Regulation (EEC) 2092/91 of 24 June 1991 on organic production of agricultural products and indications referring thereto on agricultural products and foodstuffs(2) and the proposal(3) for including livestock production under the scope of that Regulation.

(1) OJ C 310, 9.10.1998, p. 50.

(2) OJ L 198, 22.7.1991.

(3) COM(97) 747 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1431/98 by Daniel VARELA SUANZES- CARPEGNA to the Commission. European cooperation in developing the fisheries sector in third countries



Official Journal C 386 , 11/12/1998 P. 0127



WRITTEN QUESTION E-1431/98 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE) to the Commission (11 May 1998) Subject: European cooperation in developing the fisheries sector in third countries Will the Commission say what percentage of the funds earmarked for cooperation has been allocated by DG VIII to the development of the fisheries sector in West African countries over the past five years?
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1433/98 by Daniel VARELA SUANZES- CARPEGNA to the Commission. European cooperation in developing the fisheries sector in third countries



Official Journal C 386 , 11/12/1998 P. 0127



WRITTEN QUESTION E-1433/98 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE) to the Commission (11 May 1998) Subject: European cooperation in developing the fisheries sector in third countries Will the Comission indicate the nature and cost of the fisheries cooperation projects implemented or financed by DG VIII over the past five years in the following countries: South Africa, Namibia, Gabon, Senegal, Equatorial Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Côte d'Ivoire, Gambia, Sierra Leone, Mauritania, Angola, Ghana and Cameroon?
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1825/98

by Freddy Blak (PSE) to the Commission

(11 June 1998)

Subject: Monitoring of employees on the net

The latest hit with managers is programs that are marketed quite innocently as "reporting tools". In reality they are surveillance programs that allow the boss to keep an eye on every single page that staff visit when they surf the Internet and to check their e-mail. This is legal so long as firms inform staff that they are being monitored, even though the information is hidden away somewhere in a thick staff book.

Does the Commission not think that there is a need for ethical guidelines for monitoring staff on the net?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(16 July 1998)

If companies install reporting mechanisms where data is processed which can be related to individual users, questions of data protection arise. If electronic mail messages are read, questions of confidentiality may also arise, although this confidentiality is not safeguarded within a company network to the same extent as it is when using public telecommunications networks. These questions are governed by national law, in conformity with relevant provisions of Community directives on data protection.

Member States may also have regard to these questions in their legislation concerning relationships between employers and employees.

It does not appear appropriate at this stage to attempt to lay down more detailed rules at European level as to how companies should approach these issues. The Commission would however welcome it if companies faced with similar issues were to discuss practical solutions together and with their employees or their representatives.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0617/98

by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission

(9 March 1998)

Subject: Inclusion of islets in the Interreg programme

It is reported that the Greek Government has, quite justifiably, included six Aegean islets in the Interreg programme.

Will the Commission give its official views on this matter and say whether it intends to fund projects on these islets which quite patently form part of Greek (and therefore European) territory?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(7 May 1998)

Since 1981, when Greece acceded to the Community, the Commission has been part-financing measures and projects throughout that country.

Through the Structural Funds, the Commission part-finances measures and projects to assist the development of peripheral areas of mainland Greece and the islands under various sectoral and regional programmes in the 1994-1999 Community Support Framework and under Community initiative programmes such as Interreg II.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1891/98

by Jean-Claude Pasty (UPE) to the Commission

(9 June 1998)

Subject: Remunerations and allowances of Members of the European Institutions

In the interest of transparency over the remunerations and allowances of the Members of the various EU Institutions, about which concern has been expressed on many occasions in the European media, can the Commission provide complete figures for the remuneration (both gross and net of tax) and service-related allowances of the Members of the Commission, the Judges of the Court of Justice, the Members of the Court of Auditors and the Judges of the Court of First Instance?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(22 July 1998)

The Honourable Member asks about the remuneration and allowances of members of the institutions of the European Union. The Commission can provide an answer for its own part, but declines to respond on behalf of other autonomous institutions.

The remuneration and allowances of the members of the Commission are tied to the remuneration and allowances of the officials of the Commission, laid down in the Staff Regulations, as amended by Council Regulation No 2591/97 of 18 December 1997(1) adjusting with retroactive effect from 1st July 1997 the remuneration and pensions of officials and other servants of the European Communities and the weightings applied thereto.

The remuneration of the members of the Commission comprises the following elements:

- a basic salary.

The basic salary of a member of the Commission equals 112.5 % of the basic salary of an official of grade of A1/6, thus amounting to 617,756 BEF. For the vice-presidents of the Commission and for the President of the Commission, the basic monthly salary equals 125 % and 138 % of the salary of a grade A1/6 official.

The basic salary of the members of the Commission is subject to a progressive tax, the maximum marginal tax rate being 45 % and to a temporary contribution of 5.83 % on part of the salary. These taxes are the same as provided by the Staff Regulations for the officials of the Commission, and are paid to the budget of the Union. In addition, a contribution of 1.8 % of the salary is deducted for sickness and injury insurance.

- residence allowance of 15 % of the basic salary.

The members of the Commission are not entitled to the expatriation allowance (16 % of the basic salary) to which the expatriate officials of the Commission are entitled

- a monthly representation allowance of 24 515 BEF.

Other allowances of the members of the Commission are the same as for the officials of the Commission, as stipulated in the Staff Regulations, a copy of which is forwarded direct to the Honourable Member and to the Secretariat General of the Parliament.

Based on these elements, the monthly net salary of a member of the Commission is calculated at 513 410 BEF. This amount varies and can be increased by the household and child allowances.

(1) OJ L 351, 23.12.1997.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2239/98

by Franco Malerba (PPE) to the Commission

(10 July 1998)

Subject: Measures to safeguard against the risk of "asteroid collision"

Although the collision of a large asteroid with the earth is a rare event, the documented identification of more than 150 craters produced by the impact of asteroids in areas of the planet not covered by sea and the extremely large number of craters that can be seen on the moon are a reminder that such events occur all the time in the region of space in which the earth orbits. The collision of a large asteroid (about 10 km in diameter) with the earth could lead to the extinction of many plant and animal species, but if its trajectory were identified very early on it is quite likely that a catastrophe could be successfully averted. However, the detection and monitoring of asteroids is not easy because they are relatively small and hence their luminosity is low.

On 20 March 1996, the Council of Europe approved the Lorenzi resolution 1080/96, which invites the countries of Europe to fund research into protecting the planet from asteroids within a framework of international cooperation.

Although various research centres in Europe carry out research into asteroids, a request for funding for research into NEOs (Near Earth Objects) submitted in January 1997 to DG XII of the European Commission by 9 groups from 8 EEC countries has been rejected, whereas in the United States $10 million has been invested in three research programmes that are already up and running: Spacewatch, Loneos and NEAT.

How does the Commission intend to deal with the global risk of collision with asteroids, what research work and programmes does it intend to support and what international collaboration does it consider necessary?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(8 September 1998)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to written question E-1578/98 by Mr Ford(1).

(1) See page 150.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1607/98

by Mirja Ryynänen (ELDR) to the Commission

(11 May 1998)

Subject: Information in schoolbooks about other EU Member States

According to press reports in Finland, schoolbooks in use in certain EU Member States contain totally inaccurate information about Finland. Books in use in France, for example, portray Finland on the basis of pictures from the 1950s and distorted information. There is no mention of our current modern information technology society.

The EU expends considerable amounts of money on education and various programmes and separate information campaigns. Information campaigns to promote European citizenship cannot be successful if the basic information provided in schools about other Member States is both inadequate and distorted.

What does the Commission propose to do to ensure that schoolbooks in the Member States contain accurate and up-to-date basic information about all Member States?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(15 June 1998)

In relation to the specific content of teaching and didactic materials in a given Member State, the Commission has no competence to intervene, since this is a field where the subsidiarity principle applies under Article 126 of the EC Treaty.

Article 126 states that the Community shall contribute to the development of quality education by encouraging cooperation between Member States. Together with the Socrates programme which encourages cooperation between Member States, the information network on education in Europe (Eurydice) produces and disseminates information on systems and reforms in the field of education in the participating Member States. Eurydice has recently published the third edition of a booklet on the key data in education in the Community, which is based on the contribution of the participating Member States to the Socrates programme.

However, Article 126 also stipulates that the Community has to respect fully the responsibility of the Member States for the content of teaching and the organization of education systems.

Nevertheless, the Commission will draw the attention of the educational French authorities to the aspects underlined by the Honourable Member.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2054/98

by Felipe Camisón Asensio (PPE) to the Commission

(7 July 1998)

Subject: Degree of compliance with Community law in the Member States

With reference to the above topic and, in particular, to the data for 1997 as compared with those for 1996, could the Commission say at what rate directives are incorporated into national law in each of the 15 Member States? How many reasoned opinions are produced and how many cases are referred to the Court of Justice?

Which are the sectors in respect of which the Commission has had to intervene most?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(16 July 1998)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the 15th report on the monitoring of the application of Community law(1), which was transmitted to Parliament on 27 May 1998 and contains all the information necessary to answer the question.

(1) COM(98) 317 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1387/98

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) and Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(7 May 1998)

Subject: Peat mines in the Polesia region in Belarus

Is the Commission aware of the importance of the peat mines in the Polesia region in Belarus as a carbon sink and as an area of outstanding importance for biodiversity?

What can the Commission do to help conserve this area as part of its strategies on climate change and biodiversity conservation? Is there an EU fund available for such support?

Has the Commission been approached by the Belarus authorities for such help or, conversely, for support to carry out destructive activities such as river management and drainage, and with what result?

Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission

(5 June 1998)

The Commission is aware of the existence of peat mines in the Polesia region of Belarus and their impact on the environment.

At this stage, given current bilateral relations with Belarus, the Commission is not envisaging specific action in relation to such peat mines.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0719/98

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) and Salvatore Tatarella (NI) to the Commission

(18 March 1998)

Subject: The VAT Committee

In connection with the proposal for a Council Directive amending Directive 77/388/EEC on the common system of value-added tax (the Value-added Tax Committee) (COM(97) 325 final - 97/0186 CNS)(1), could the Commission ensure that the opinions drawn up by the VAT Committee, irrespective of whether it is acting as a regulatory committee or as an advisory committee, are published in the Official Journal?

(1) OJ C 278, 13.9.1997, p. 6.

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0718/98 and E-0719/98 given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(6 May 1998)

When implementing powers are conferred on the Commission, it exercises these powers pursuant to the procedures laid down by Council Decision 87/373/EEC of 13 July 1987(1), in which case the Commission submits draft measures to a regulatory body composed of the representatives of the Member States.

The Commission does not publish the draft measures. It may, however, consult interested parties.

It follows from the Commission's proposal on the VAT committee(2) that any decision taken by the Commission, assisted by the VAT committee as a regulatory body, will be a legal act and as such, it will be published.

By contrast, the Commission cannot take legal responsibility for publishing opinions which have no legal value because they only result from discussions in an advisory committee which has no powers to interpret Community legislation or to approve specific rules of application.

(1) OJ L 197, 18.7.1987.

(2) OJ C 278, 13.9.1997.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0369/98

by Nuala Ahern (V) to the Commission

(24 February 1998)

Subject: Report by the British Government's Radioactive Waste Management Advisory Committee

Have the Commission's relevant energy, environment and transport directorates assessed the proposals set out by the British Government's Radioactive Waste Management Advisory Committee (RWMAC) in its September 1997 report on the import and export of radioactive waste involving the United Kingdom, and will the Commission make a statement on the interpretation made by the RWMAC report on Directive 92/3/Euratom on the supervision and control of shipments of radioactive waste between Member States and into and out of the Community with regard to its implementation in the United Kingdom?(1)

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(16 March 1998)

Directive 92/3/Euratom on the supervision and control of shipments of radioactive waste between Member States and into and out of the Community is implemented in the United Kingdom by Statutory Instrument 1993 No 3031, Atomic Energy and Radioactive Substances, the Transfrontier Shipments of Radioactive Waste Regulations 1993, publication date 2 December 1993.

The Commission does not have the report by the radioactive waste management advisory committee (RWMAC) on the import and export of radioactive waste involving the United Kingdom, dated September 1997. The Commission will complete this answer as soon as it has obtained and considered the report in question.

(1) OJ L 35, 12.2.1992, p. 24.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1217/98

by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(29 April 1998)

Subject: European Central Bank

Pursuant to Article 109a(2)(a) of the EU Treaty the Executive Board of the European Central Bank is to comprise the President, the Vice-President and four other members. Paragraph 2(b) states that they are all to be appointed by common accord of the governments of the Member States at the level of Heads of State or Government, on a recommendation from the Council, after it has consulted the European Parliament and the bank's Governing Council.

Would the Commission say whether some other kind of executive post could be created so that all the EMU member countries are represented on the ECB's Executive Board?

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission

(11 June 1998)

The EC Treaty is clear in saying that the executive board of the European central bank (ECB) consists of the President and the Vice-President and of four other members (Article 109a (2) of the EC Treaty). If there are Member States with a derogation, the number of members of the executive board may be smaller, but in no circumstances shall it be less than four (Article 109l (1) of the EC Treaty).

It should be noted that the governing council of the ECB, which is the highest decision-making body, comprises the governors of the national central banks of all participating Member States and the members of the executive board of the ECB.

The ECB decision-making bodies also include the general council. Its competences are laid down in Article 47 of the European system of central banks (ESCB) Statute and it comprises the governors of the national central banks of all Member States.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1388/98

by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission

(7 May 1998)

Subject: European race relations proposal on the basis of the Amsterdam Treaty

Following the Commission's welcome proposals for European-wide action on race relations on the basis of the unratified Amsterdam Treaty, when does it intend to come forward with a similar proposal on discrimination against disabled people?

Does the Commission accept that there should be no hierarchy of discrimination and that, therefore, other proposals should be brought forward to combat discrimination against groups referred to in the Amsterdam Treaty?
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1184/98

by Graham Mather (PPE) to the Commission

(29 April 1998)

Subject: Human rights in the Dominican Republic

What action is the European Union taking to improve the human rights situation in the Dominican Republic? Will this action benefit Haitian plantation workers?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission

(11 June 1998)

Historically speaking, relations between the Dominican Republic and Haiti have been tense. The origin of it has been the presence of Haitian workers in the sugar production of the Dominican Republic.

The Commission is attentive to this situation and has over the years encouraged a dialogue between the two countries, which is slowly producing positive results. In fact, since 1995 one can notice an improvement in relations between Haiti and the Dominican Republic to which the democratically elected presidents of the two countries have largely contributed. President Préval visited Santo Domingo in March 1996 and President Fernandez Reyna is expected to visit Port-au-Prince in June 1998.

The Commission, with the support of the Member States, is financing through the budget line B-7020 (Human rights and democratisation) a campaign of civic education which was beneficial during the legislative and municipal elections of May 1998 in the Dominican Republic.

Under the responsibility of the Commission delegations in Santo Domingo and Port-au-Prince, technical meetings (headed by the national authorizing officers of the two countries) have taken place in the recent past with the objective to design common actions and programmes jointly benefiting the two countries in the areas of environment, transport and infrastructure (all of which will be financed by the European development fund). One of the most important and sensitive projects which the Dominican government has proposed to be funded by the Commission focuses precisely on the support to migrant workers (mainly Haitian labourers) in sugar production areas ("Bateyes") of the Dominican Republic.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1080/98

by Jean-Antoine Giansily (UPE) to the Commission

(7 April 1998)

Subject: Prolongation of existing block exemption regulations

The conference organized by DG IV on 6 and 7 October 1997 to consult interested parties on the Green Paper on Vertical Restraints in EC Competition Policy (COM(96) 0721) does not seem to have arrived at any very clear conclusions.

In the light of that meeting, does the Commission agree that it would be sensible to simply prolong the existing block exemption regulations for a further fifteen years or so?

At a time of budgetary restraint forced on Member States and citizens by the Treaty of Maastricht, would not such an approach enable the Commission to make savings in operational expenditure while avoiding the need for firms to go through complex bureaucratic notification procedures?