ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2450/98

by Angela Sierra González (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(30 July 1998)

Subject: Port at Granadilla (Tenerife, Canaries)

The Spanish Ministry of Public Works is supporting the construction of a port on the coast which forms part of the municipal district of Granadilla (Tenerife, Canary Islands). The port will be large enough to contain, among other things, a breakwater 3 600 m long and a quay 2 000 m long. The area of sea taken up by this new installation will stretch to more than one million square metres.

The project will have a wide-ranging impact on the environment, including:

a) direct and indirect effects on part of an area put forward as an area of Community interest by the Canaries Government, known as the "Sebadales del Sur de Tenerife".

That area contains a large number of habitats covered in the Habitat Directive which would be seriously damaged, e.g:

- sand banks

- cliffs with flora endemic to the Macaronesian Islands

- thermophilous scrubs.

The species Caretta caretta, a reptile listed as a priority species in Annex II to Directive 92/43/EEC(1) can also be found in the area;

b) irreversible changes to the formation of sediment along the south-eastern coast of the island, which would seriously affect the Montaña Roja protected natural area, also proposed as a place of Community interest. The habitats listed in the directive and found in this area include the priority habitat defined as fixed dunes with herbaceous vegetation (grey dunes);

c) various effects on biological development, the functioning of the coastal system, marine pollution in the area, the social and economic impact on the coast, etc.

Is the Commission aware of the port construction project in Granadilla?

Does the port receive any form of Community funding?

Does the Commission consider the conservation of areas which are to be protected under the Habitat Directive to be compatible with the construction of the above infrastructure?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(17 September 1998)

The Commission was not aware of the situation the Honourable Member has described. It will make the necessary contacts to gather full details of the situation and to ensure that the Community environment legislation relevant to this particular case is being fully observed.

It can confirm, however, that neither the European Regional Development Fund nor the Cohesion Fund has co-financed the project.

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3020/98

by José Barros Moura (PSE) to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Meda-Democracy Programme

B'Tselem - The Israeli Information Centre for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories - has asked me the following question:

'Parliament initiated the Meda-Democracy and Human Rights Programme in 1996, which we understand has proven very useful in the promotion of human rights and democracy in the Mediterranean. We have heard that the Commission is envisioning major administrative changes to the Programme that would have a negative effect on the achievements of the Programme. We would like the Commission to explain to use the nature of the changes envisaged and to convince us that this would improve the work of NGOs in the field.'

Can the Commission respond to the concerns of NGOs working in the field to provide visibility and hope as regards human rights and democracy?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission

(9 November 1998)

We envisage changes to the MEDA Democracy programme following the implementation of the proposal for a Council Regulation(1) setting out requirements for the implementation of Community operations contributing to the overall objective of the development and consolidation of democracy and the rule of law and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, in the Occupied Territories as in the Community's Mediterranean partner countries. The proposal is currently under consultation with Parliament.

The Regulation has yet to be approved in detail, but the main innovations are intended to make financing decisions more transparent, for example by obliging the Commission to submit an annual report to Parliament and the Council on the operations financed and an overall evaluation of such operations three years after the Regulation enters into force.

(1) OJ C 282, 18.9.1997.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2905/98

by Marie-Noëlle Lienemann (PSE) to the Commission

(2 October 1998)

Subject: Creation of an international therapeutic solidarity fund

Following on the conclusions of the Presidency of the European Council of 13 December 1997 (paragraph 58) on health and the procedure for establishing a therapeutic solidarity fund to combat AIDS in the developing countries, what action is the Commission taking to set up this therapeutic fund rapidly so that pilot programmes are available to give access to treatment for people with HIV/AIDS in the developing countries?

It is becoming extremely urgent for the most industrialised countries to implement a concrete policy of international solidarity to combat AIDS.

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission

(22 October 1998)

The European Council of 13 December 1997 asked the Commission to look into the establishment of a therapeutic solidarity fund under the aegis of UNAIDS to help combat AIDS in developing countries.

The Commission analysed this issue in its Communication to the Council and the European Parliament for increased solidarity to confront AIDS in developing countries(1). The Communication gives a survey of work to date to combat the human immunodeficiency virus/ acquired immunodeficiency syndrome. In the light of the success of targeted preventive operations, it stresses the importance of supporting and reinforcing health-care systems. It also looks at a number of possibilities for creating new solidarity mechanisms, taking account of the need to prepare any such mechanisms collectively.

This Communication is currently being discussed by Parliament and the Council, and particularly by the group of Member State experts on this subject.

(1) COM(1998) 407 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3229/98

by Edith Müller (V) to the Commission

(26 October 1998)

Subject: Competitions

Can the Commission provide the following statistical information in respect of each of the staff recruitment competitions held over the last five years: number of applications, number of candidates admitted to the written tests, number of candidates admitted to the oral tests and number of successful candidates, with the figures in each case being broken down by sex and nationality?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(25 November 1998)

At the end of 1998 the Commission will present a three-year report on the recruitment requirements of the Community institutions on the basis of Article 2 of Annex XI to the Staff Regulations. The report will include the statistics requested by the Honourable Member.

In the immediate future, the Commission is sending the Honourable Member and Parliament's Secretariat a set of (not necessarily complete) statistics on the A and B open competitions organised and managed by the Commission in the period 1993-97.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3144/98

by Roberto Mezzaroma (PPE) to the Commission

(16 October 1998)

Subject: Relations with South Africa

With reference to political and economic relations with South Africa, what is the nature and scale of the programmes planned or already being implemented: implementation times, total resources committed or to be committed within a specific time frame; the terms of their political, economic and technical management according to the specificities of individual programmes; the type of undertakings or consortia it is intended to involve in implementing the programmes or that have already been consulted; lastly, what contacts does the Commission have on the spot, what are the names of those directly responsible and where are they located?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission

(9 November 1998)

The Commission is sending direct to the Honourable Member and the Secretariat general of the Parliament a copy of the annual report on the European programme for reconstruction in South Africa (EPRD) (1996 and 1997). This report and its annexes (legal basis, multiannual indicative programme, lists of awarded contracts) contains the information required by the Honourable Member. A list of programmes to be launched in 1998 is also sent direct to the Honourable Member and to the Secretariat general of the Parliament.

The list of officials directly involved in the implementation of the EPRD in Pretoria and in Brussels is forwarded direct to the Honourable Member and to the Secretariat general of the Parliament.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3537/98

by Richard Corbett (PSE) to the Commission

(25 November 1998)

Subject: Budget line 3029

Could the Commission publish a list of organisations benefiting from grants given under budget line 3029 over the last five years?

What is the Commission's response to criticisms that there is a bias in such subsidies towards Catholic organisations, whereas non-religious organisations and left-of-centre organisations, even with large memberships, have benefited far less?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(14 December 1998)

Every year the Commission has sent to the Parliament the list of organisations receiving grants from the budget item relating to "Assistance for non-governmental international youth organisations" (currently item A-3029). The lists of beneficiaries since 1995 have been sent directly to the Honourable Member and to the Parliament's Secretariat-General.

The eligibility and selection criteria applied were published in the Official Journal in the call for the submission of proposals (for the 1998 selection procedure)(1). These criteria do not make any reference to the religious or non-religious nature of organisations. It can be seen from the list of beneficiaries that organisations representing a number of religions are included, and that they make up only a small proportion of recipients: in 1998, fewer than 10 % of the organisations receiving assistance described themselves as being primarily of a religious nature. If most of these are Catholic, this is because a larger number of applications for subsidies were received from Catholic organisations. It should be noted that no application from a non-Catholic religious organisation has been rejected in the last few years.

Furthermore, one of the selection criteria is the representativeness of the organisation concerned; this criterion has of course also been applied with regard to political organisations.

Finally, it is clear from the list of beneficiary organisations that most are neither religious nor political in nature and are instead focused on other objectives, such as certain types of activity for young people, or students' organisations.

(1) OJ C 374, 10.12.1997.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1895/98

by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission

(16 June 1998)

Subject: A13 - M25 Wennington to Mardyke Road improvement scheme: concrete road surface

Does the Commission accept that the use of concrete road surfacing produces more dust and higher noise levels than any other type of road surfacing material? Would the Commission agree that the use of low-noise or asphalt road surfaces should be standard practice across Europe, thus affording greater protection for our environment, and providing a better quality of life for people living in close proximity to main road networks?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(3 September 1998)

Decisions on the use of concrete, asphalt or other pavement material for road construction depend on factors such as stability of the foundations, general weather conditions, investment costs, maintenance costs, road safety requirements, environmental requirements and the availability of materials.

National and local authorities responsible for road construction are best placed to decide what material is most appropriate, for particular conditions and requirements.

The Commission is, therefore, not in a position to agree that the use of porous asphalt should be standard practice across Europe.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2934/98

by José Pomés Ruiz (PPE) to the Council

(24 September 1998)

Subject: The crisis in Albania

The current situation in Albania, where the passive attitude of the international community appears to have been the dominant feature over the past years, may jeopardise the maintenance of stability in the region, and the unrest will have evident repercussions on EU countries and future members.

Has the Council taken any measures which would enable security in the area to be increased?

In view of the growth in the number of new conflicts in the country and international passivity, does the EU intend to embark on any kind of mediation or action to resolve the conflict?

Reply

(14 December 1998)

The Council regrets that the Honourable Member considers the Rome Conference of 1997, the joint OSCE, EU, Council of Europe, NATO and WEU activities, the providing of ECU 70,4 million in 1997 and of an estimated ECU 105 million in PHARE support for 1998/99, the Commission and EU troika experts missions, the presence of the European Community Monitoring Mission (ECMM), the Cooperation Agreement, the humanitarian aid provided by ECHO, the recent establishment of the "Friends of Albania" Group and the EU participation in the International Conference on Albania as a passive attitude of the international community.

The Council certainly is deeply concerned about maintaining the stability in the region and would like to recall that the European Union and its individual member States are by far the largest contributors to the enhancement of stability in Albania and are likely to remain so for the near future.

The Council wishes to draw the Honourable Member's attention to the Council decision of 22 September 1998 adopted on the basis of Article J.4(2) of the Treaty on European Union, requesting the Western European Union to complete urgently its study on the feasibility of possible options for international police operations in Albania in order to assist the Albanian authorities to restore law and order in that country. At its meeting on 26 October 1998, the Council welcomed the transmission of the WEU supplement to its feasibility study.

The Council is looking forward to cooperate with the new Government in Tirana, especially in the areas of economic and democratic reform, and the enhancement of internal security. It made clear the absolute necessity of progress in the national reconciliation process, and of the adoption of the constitution, and urged all political forces, and in particular the leadership of the Democratic Party to live up to their responsibility towards the Albanian people.

The Council welcomed the successful holding of the International Conference in Tirana on 30 October, which took stock of cooperation between the International Community and Albania and mapped out cooperation with the new Government in its pledge to restore democracy, security and political and economic stability to the country.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2792/98

by Viviane Reding (PPE) to the Council

(18 September 1998)

Subject: Persecution of the Baha'i community in Iran

On 21 July 1998 Mr Ruhollah Rawhani, an Iranian Baha'i convicted of having converted a young woman from Islam to the Baha'i faith, was executed in Mashhad, Iran.

The young woman in question, raised as a Baha'i since childhood, denies having been converted. No contact was permitted with the convicted man, who was denied the right to choose a lawyer. Mr Rawhani is the first Baha'i to have been executed since 1992. One cannot but fear the worst for another four Baha'is arrested and convicted alongside Mr Rawhani.

What is the position of the Council vis-à-vis the persecution with complete impunity of Iranian nationals in Iran solely on the grounds of creed? What measures does the Council intend to take to avert the imminent execution of the four convicted Baha'is, alert the international community and put pressure on the Iranian authorities to respect one of the most basic human rights?
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2504/98

by Astrid Lulling (PPE) to the Commission

(30 July 1998)

Subject: Single market and exclusive distribution contracts

Because of the small size of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, retailers in Luxembourg always have to buy from Belgian suppliers who have concluded exclusive distribution contracts for Belgium and Luxembourg.

In some cases "physical" delivery of the goods to the Luxembourg retailer is carried out directly by a producer or wholesaler who is not based in Belgium, whereas "accounting" delivery goes through the Belgian intermediary, adding to the initial price a commission which can vary between 15 and 40 %.

Does the Commission consider this system, which often results in the price charged to the Luxembourg retailer being higher than the consumer price of the same product in neighbouring countries, to be compatible with the single market and the principle of fair competition?

What measures could the Commission take to ensure that retailers in Luxembourg have the right to buy their stock in any country they choose where there are distribution networks for the same product and thus escape exorbitantly expensive distribution networks?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(6 November 1998)

Commission Regulation (EEC) 1983/83 of 22 June 1983 on the application of Article 85(3) of the Treaty to categories of exclusive distribution agreements(1) exempts, pursuant to Article 85(3) of the EC Treaty, exclusive distribution agreements, that is agreements whereby one party agrees with the other to supply certain goods for resale within the whole or a defined area of the common market only to that other. It is therefore in line with the Community competition rules to assign to one distributor the task of reselling certain goods in a defined area of the common market, such as the Belgo-Luxembourg area.

However, the Regulation provides that the block exemption ceases to apply to the agreements in question if the contract goods cannot be supplied by other importers in the area covered by the exclusive distribution agreement or obtained by users or intermediaries established in that area from undertakings outside it whose terms are more favourable.

(1) OJ L 173, 30.6.1983.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2271/98

by Bill Miller (PSE) to the Commission

(22 July 1998)

Subject: Excise duty

Does the Commission consider that the present regime of excise duties in the different Member States is satisfactory or does it believe that further coordination in this area is necessary?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(2 October 1998)

With regard to the harmonisation of excise duty rates and structures the Honourable Member is referred to the first paragraph of the reply to his written question E-1898/98(1).

With regard to the question of co-ordination in respect of the control of movements of goods subject to excise duty, the Commission believes that greater co-operation is necessary and is actively working with the Member States to achieve this. In this context, it would refer the Honourable Member to its 1998/1999 work programme on the fight against fraud(2) which sets out several measures which the Commission intends to initiative in order to reinforce co-ordination.

(1) OJ C 50, 22.2.1999, p. 111.

(2) COM(98) 278 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2087/98

by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(10 July 1998)

Subject: Harmful effects of CS gas

Following the increasing concerns about the harmful effects of CS gas, will the Commission undertake a study into the risks to human health of orthochlorobenzylidene malononitrile?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(1 October 1998)

Present Community legislation provides for the control of the use of certain chemicals in order to protect man (including workers and consumers) and the environment.

Council Regulation (EEC) 793/93(1) establishes a general framework for the systematic evaluation and control of the risks of "existing chemical substances", that is the substances used within the Community before September 1981 and listed in the European inventory of existing commercial chemical substances (Einecs).

Due to the large number of substances listed in Einecs (about 100 000), a priority-setting approach was introduced by the Regulation. Three priority lists of 109 substances were drawn up. These substances, which require attention as chemicals which might pose a risk to man and the environment and for which a risk assessment should be carried out, are listed in three Commission regulations adopted in the period 1994-1997. Ortho-chlorobenzylidene malononitrile is a substance which, whilst listed in Einecs, is not included so far in one of the three priority lists.

However, the Commission, in consultation with the Member States, has recently started work to draw up a new list of priority substances requiring immediate attention because of their potential effects on man or the environment. Ortho-chlorobenzylidene malononitrile may then be considered as a substance candidate for this new fourth priority list.

It may however be noted that ortho-chlorobenzylidene malononitrile has not been classified as a dangerous substance in the framework of Council Directive 67/548/EEC(2) on the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous substances.

Within the fifth framework programme for research and technological development (RTD) (1998-2002)(3) it will be possible to apply for research on the health effects of CS gas, specifically under key action 1 "Health, food and environmental research".

(1) OJ L 84, 5.4.1993.

(2) OJ L 196, 16.8.1967.

(3) COM(98) 8.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2611/98

by Josep Pons Grau (PSE) to the Commission

(1 September 1998)

Subject: Human rights in Equatorial Guinea

Recent events in Equatorial Guinea have been marked by the mass trial at which 117 members of the Bubi ethnic group were denied even the minimum guarantees expected of a state based on the rule of law and where the convictions handed down included 15 death sentences. The conditions in the gaol housing the convicted prisoners have been described by Amnesty International sources as subhuman in the extreme, and are presumed to have caused the death of Martín Puye of the Movimiento de Autodeterminación de la Isla de Bioko (Bioko Island Movement for Self-Determination).

The Government of Equatorial Guinea has shown itself utterly indisposed to improve its record on democratisation or human rights.

In these circumstances, will the Commission reconsider its cooperation links with Equatorial Guinea? Will it invoke the "democracy clause" in the Lomé Convention?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission

(5 October 1998)

The Commission is closely monitoring the human rights situation in Equatorial Guinea. It has, on a number of occasions, interceded through appropriate channels, together with the Member States, on behalf of those arrested and convicted following the incidents which occurred on the island of Bioko in January 1998.

The Commission has made it clear to the authorities of Equatorial Guinea that the progressive resumption of cooperation is contingent on progress with regard to respect for human rights, democratic principles and the rule of law, in accordance with Article 5 of the fourth Lomé Convention. In this connection, it is prepared to support measures aimed at reforms which will improve the situation and ensure the rule of law and the democratic functioning of institutions.