ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-4156/97 by Eryl McNally (PSE) to the Commission (21 January 1998)

Subject: Single vehicle approval scheme

Following a letter from one of my constituents, I would like to draw the Commission's attention to the British Department of Transport's Single Vehicle Approval Scheme, which includes changes to Personal Import requirements and is due to be enacted on 1 January 1998.

By its nature the Single Vehicle Approval Scheme (SVA) will significantly curtail the existing rights of British Europeans to import privately - whether from within the EU or outside - an American-built motor vehicle for personal use.

Despite the impact that the SVA legislation will have on both individuals and small and medium-sized businesses, many of those who will be affected remain unaware of the implications of the SVA because of a lack of publicity regarding this subject.

In the light of the above, what can the Commission do - and with the utmost urgency - to encourage the British Government to suspend the introduction of the SVA so that proper and full public consultation may take place?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (9 March 1998)

Following a complaint concerning the possible incompatibility of the Motor Vehicles (Approval) Regulations 1996 establishing a single vehicle approval scheme, with Article 30 EC Treaty, the Commission wrote to the British authorities on 4 December 1997 in order to obtain some clarification on the aims and effects of this legislation due to be implemented on 1 January 1998.

Furthermore, following notification 97/0675/UK pursuant to Council Directive 83/189/EEC of 28 March 1983 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations ((OJ L 109, 26.4.1983. )) concerning the Motor Vehicles (approval) (amendment) (No 2) Regulations 1997, the Commission sent a detailed opinion to the British authorities on 5 December 1997.

After that, the British authorities decided to postpone the implementation of the Motor Vehicles (Approval) Regulations 1996 until 1 May 1998.

On 12 January 1998, a meeting between the British authorities and the Commission was held in order to discuss this matter. Further consultations will take place soon to find a solution which will safeguard both the safety of road users in the United Kingdom and the free movement of goods within the internal market.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3707/97

by Ulf Holm (V) to the Commission

(19 November 1997)

Subject: EU subsidies to the auto industry

According to the press, the EU is giving the car manufacturer, Jaguar, some one billion kronor in subsidies for the further development of a Jaguar model. The car will cost some one million kronor on the market. According to Commission President Santer's chief press officer, Colin Cook, the subsidy is to help them get a foothold in the segment currently occupied by the BMW 5-series. Jaguar cars are widely recognized as luxury vehicles with heavy fuel consumption.

1. To which other car manufacturers does the EU give financial support and how much?

2. Does the Commission consider it appropriate to subsidize the development of a luxury car that the absolute majority of EU citizens will never be able to buy?

3. Does the Commission consider that subsidies for the development of fuel-guzzling cars such as Jaguars can continue once the Amsterdam Treaty is in force in view of the fact that "sustainable development" is now written into the Treaty and will be a significant criterion in EU policy?

Supplementary answer

given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(18 September 1998)

This supplementary answer includes the information requested by the Honourable Member in point 1 of his question.

Under Community support framework II for Portugal for the period 1994-99, and more specifically the industry programme PEDIP II, a total of 97 individual projects in the automobile sector (classification codes 34100, 34200, 34300) are receiving public aid. The total volume of incentives approved until the end of November 1997 was ECU 310 million, of which ECU 235 million has been paid out. The European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) finances 75 % of the corresponding aid schemes.

Via the ERDF and under the 1994-99 industry programme for the Objective 1 regions in Italy, the Commission is also jointly financing the general aid scheme established by Law 488/92 for supporting productive investment in less favoured areas. In this context, five large projects (investments of more than ECU 15 million) for the automobile industry have been presented by the Italian authorities: three for Fiat Auto (investments amounting to ECU 635 million, with ECU 104 million to be provided by way of public assistance), one for Fiat Iveco (an investment of ECU 16 million, with ECU 4 million in public assistance) and one for Isotta Fraschini (an investment of ECU 20 million, with ECU 10 million in public assistance). These projects are currently being examined by the Commission.

Two firms have received aid from the ERDF in Spain: Fabrication des Automobiles Renault España SA and Suzuki Manufacturing Spain SA. According to the information transmitted by the Spanish authorities for the monitoring committee meeting of 14 July 1998, the amounts granted under the "Incentivos Regionales" operational programme between 1 January 1994 and 31 December 1997 were ESP 890 527 400 (around ECU 5,3 million) to Suzuki Ciudad Real, ESP 576 217 739 (around ECU 3,43 million) to Renault Sevilla and ESP 1 628 416 865 (around ECU 9,69 million) to Renault Valladolid.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-4101/97 by Christine Crawley (PSE) to the Commission (16 January 1998)

Subject: Alleged state aid in favour of Italian Jewellery manufacturers

Can the Commission explain why Italian Jewellery manufacturers are allegedly receiving favourable tax treatment which result in their selling to European customers jewellery at low prices which represent the gold content alone and do not include such costs as available levels of finance, distribution and selling?

Would the Commission also provide information on the Italian Government's alleged agreement with jewellery manufacturers which allows them to write off a percentage of weight of gold they process, irrespective of whether this gold is lost or not? Is this not unfairly discriminating against jewellery manufacturers in other EU Member States?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission (3 February 1998)

By fax received on 17 October 1997, the Honourable Member first brought to the attention of the Commission allegations made by a British jewellery firm against its Italian competitors who are supposedly benefiting from favourable tax treatment and other public support. According to the complainant, part of this information comes from articles in the jewellery press.

On 23 October 1997, the Commission wrote to the Honourable Member explaining that after a scrutiny of the alleged measures, it appeared that the information provided was not sufficiently detailed to allow the Commission to further investigate this issue. The Honourable Member was therefore invited to ask her correspondent to submit a detailed description of the alleged unfair state aid measures as well as a copy of the press articles in question.

To date, this additional information has not been received by the Commission.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0310/98 by Magda Aelvoet (V) to the Council (9 February 1998)

Subject: Security in Great Lakes Region of Africa

Does the Council intend to support international efforts for the reactivation of the United Nations International Commission (Rwanda) and the extension of its mandate to investigate arms flows to the Great Lakes region, as called for by the European Parliament? Does the Council support international calls for the deployment of United Nations or Organization of African Unity observers to key airstrips and crossing points in the Great Lakes region?

Answer (30 April 1998)

The Council would be happy to support international efforts to re-activate the United Nations International Commission. The United States has proposed enlarging the mandate of that Commission, including a reference to Burundi, and has discussed elements for a draft Security Council resolution with representatives of African countries at the UN. However, no text has yet been proposed.

No proposals have been made to deploy UN or OAU observers to key airstrips and border crossings in the region. The Council would, however, give careful consideration to any such proposal.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0500/98 by Jaak Vandemeulebroucke (ARE) to the Council (17 February 1998)

Subject: Embargo on the supply of arms to Burundi

In its resolution of 18 December 1997, and on the recommendation of the UN Special Rapporteur for Burundi, the European Parliament called for an embargo on the supply of arms to the belligerent parties in Burundi.

As part of an active peace policy, is the Council prepared to act in accordance with that resolution and, more generally, to prohibit Member States from participating in the supply of armaments to third countries?

Answer (30 April 1998)

The Council is aware of the Resolution on Burundi adopted by the European Parliament on 18 December 1997 and welcomes its condemnation of atrocities and human rights violations against the civilian population and of the continuing supply of arms to the opposing parties in the conflict.

Although there is no EU arms embargo as such against Burundi, Member States act in accordance with the Common Criteria defined in the conclusions of the European Councils of 29 June 1991 and 26-27 June 1992, on the basis of which the Amsterdam European Council (16-17 June 1997) called for renewed and sustained attention in the framework of the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) to developing a responsible and coherent arms export policy throughout the Union. In the case of Burundi the competent national authorities do not grant licences for arms exports. If arms do reach Burundi from or via a Member State, the case is investigated by the relevant national authorities.

The Council will continue to follow the situation in Burundi and the Great Lakes Region closely, including the issue of arms transfers.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0180/98 by Jesús Cabezón Alonso (PSE) to the Commission (5 February 1998)

Subject: International anti-drugs centre, Panama

The US and Panamanian Governments have reached an agreement in principle whereby, for a period of twelve years starting on 31 December 1999, the two countries will jointly operate an international anti-drugs centre.

It is desirable that other Latin American countries should be involved in the project, and this is indeed likely to be the case.

Has the Commission considered the value of EU involvement in, and cooperation with, what may prove to be a major focal point for joint action by both American continents in the fight against drugs?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission (6 March 1998)

In its contacts with Panama and with the United States the Commission has been apprised of the discussions in progress between those two countries with a view to setting up, at Howard base in the Panama Canal zone, a multilateral centre to combat drug trafficking.

However, at this stage, no agreement appears to have been reached as yet on the role of this centre in the fight against drugs in the region or on the Latin American countries which might subscribe to this initiative.

That being so, the possibility of Community participation in the centre's activities has not been examined.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0111/98 by Markus Ferber (PPE) to the Commission (30 January 1998)

Subject: Commission publications

Can the Commission state, in respect of its publications:

1. How many publications are issued by all the Directorates-General, including the Joint Research Centre and the Commission offices in the Member States?

2. What is the number of publications per Directorate-General and which budget lines are used to finance the publications of the individual Directorates-General?

3. What is the total level of financial appropriations for Commission publications, and what is the level of appropriations for publications broken down by each Directorate-General?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (16 March 1998)

The Commission is sending the information requested direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0222/98 by Markus Ferber (PPE) to the Commission (13 February 1998)

Subject: EU aid from the social and regional funds for Bavarian Swabia

Can the Commission provide the following information on EU economic and regional aid for the region of Bavarian Swabia:

1. How much EU structural aid - broken down by fund and Community initiative - went to that region in 1997?

2. What sum went to agriculture?

3. How many jobs were created with EU economic and regional aid in the region of Bavarian Swabia in 1997?

4. How much EU structural aid went to comparable regions in other Member States in 1997?

5. How many jobs were created with EU economic and regional aid in comparable regions in other Member States in 1997?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (16 March 1998)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0175/98 by Mark Watts (PSE) to the Commission (5 February 1998)

Subject: Disposal of sewage and waste water

What are the relevant EU directives and regulations relating to disposal of sewage and waste water into the sea?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (5 March 1998)

The Community legislation in force concerning discharges of waste water into the sea and other aquatic environments (fresh water, estuaries) consists of the following directives:

- Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning urban waste-water treatment ((OJ L 135, 30.5.1991.));

- Council Directive 96/61/EC of 24 September 1996 concerning integrated pollution prevention and control ((OJ L 257, 10.10.1996.)); this Directive concerns industrial discharges;

- Council Directive 76/464/EEC of 4 May 1976 on pollution caused by certain dangerous substances discharged into the aquatic environment of the Community ((OJ L 129, 18.5.1976.));

- Council Directive 91/676/EEC of 12 December 1991 concerning the protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources ((OJ L 375, 31.12.1991.)). This Directive provides in particular for measures to prevent water pollution caused by runoff of liquids containing livestock manure and vegetable effluent such as silage.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0084/98 by Carlos Robles Piquer (PPE) to the Council (30 January 1998)

Subject: 'Parliamentary' elections in Cuba

Elections have just been held in Cuba to fill 601 seats in the National Assembly of People's Power. Fidel Castro has repeatedly challenged 'imperialists' to learn a lesson in democracy from the elections in Cuba.

By sheer coincidence, the number of candidates also happened to be 601. The electorate have been called on to cast a 'united vote' which consists in voting en bloc for all the candidates listed on the ballot.

Does the Council consider that these elections constituted a step forward towards democracy as called for in its Common Position on Cuba? Does it consider that the Member States, which, in view of the Common Position, may perhaps be included among the 'imperialists' referred to, have been taught a lesson in true democracy?

Answer (27 April 1998)

The Council judges political developments in Cuba by same criteria that it applies to the European Union's relations with other countries.

The Council is certainly not of the opinion that the recent general election in Cuba was a step towards democracy.

The necessary attributes of any free and fair elections were denied by the lack of democratic pluralism in Cuba, as noted in the Honourable Member's question and by the failure to respect human rights and fundamental freedoms, especially freedom of expression and association.

In accordance with the Union's common position on Cuba of 2 December 1996, the Council will continue to encourage, using the means at its disposal, a process of peaceful transition to pluralist democracy and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms in Cuba.

The Council hopes through this dialogue to remind the Cuban authorities of their responsibilities to the Cuban people and of their international commitments; it hopes also to convince them that only genuine progress towards democracy will ensure a peaceful transition that preserves Cuba's interests.

The release of dozens of political prisoners was announced following the visit to Cuba by Pope John Paul II; the Council hopes this will be followed by other practical steps towards democracy and respect for human rights.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0177/98 by Mark Watts (PSE) to the Commission (5 February 1998)

Subject: Disposal of sewage and waste water

Is there any EU legislation, existing or proposed, which seeks to prevent the discharge of untreated waste into the sea when the capacity of the treatment facilities is not able to cope after heavy rain and flood waters?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (5 March 1998)

Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 on the treatment of urban waste water ((OJ L 135, 30.5.1991. )) provides that the design, construction, operation and maintenance of waste-water collection and treatment systems shall be such that they, in particular, restrict any pollution of the recipient waters caused by installation overload due to rainstorms.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0311/98 by Johanna Maij-Weggen (PPE) to the Commission (10 February 1998)

Subject: Spending commitments in Italian Government finances

In the Netherlands Second Chamber the following questions were put to the Dutch Finance Minister. Will the Commission also answer these questions with a view to ensuring the greatest possible objectivity in relation to Italy's position?

1. Is the Commission aware that the Bank of Italy made a capital gain of LIT 7 billion from gold sales on which it paid capital gains tax of 50%, or 0.175% of GDP, to the Italian Government?

2. Does the Commission not agree that this profit can only have been obtained by selling the gold at significantly below its market value? Is this an accounting measure to ensure that in a roundabout way the transaction is allowed for the purposes of the EMU deficit, whereas sell-offs of gold or other State assets are not?

3. Can the Commission examine whether this transaction has been allowed by Eurostat for the purposes of the EMU deficit?

4. When looking at the excessive deficit procedure preceding admission to EMU, will the Commission see that all Member States make it clear what extent the 1997 deficit position has been influenced by ad hoc measures?

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission (16 March 1998)

In 1974, to combat speculative attacks on the Lira, the Bank of Italy obtained a USD 2 billion (1 840 MECU) loan from the Bundesbank. The loan was granted upon guarantee of 543 tons of gold that the Ufficio Italiano Cambi (UIC) bought from the Bank of Italy. The loan was redeemed in September 1978, but the gold remained in the balance sheet of the UIC. In the following years the gold was revalued quarterly, but the related capital gains were not taxed. According to the Italian tax code, capital gains are taxed only when realised. In July 1997, UIC sold the gold back to the Bank of Italy. The sale gave rise to a capital gain for the UIC and, accordingly, to a tax obligation of ITL 3.076 Trillion (1 577 MECU) or 0.16% of gross domestic product (GDP) that was settled in November 1997.

Eurostat has analysed this operation to determine its appropriate accounting treatment in terms of the system of integrated accounts ESA 79. In its decision of 27 January 1998 it is stated: 'Eurostat has decided to treat this payment as a financial transaction which has no effect on the measurement of the government deficit as defined for the purposes of the excessive deficit procedure'. In other words, this operation will not reduce the deficit in the definition which is relevant for access to economic and monetary union (EMU).

The Commission will present an assessment of the sustainability of the Italian budgetary position, as well as that of other Member States, in its report on convergence, in accordance with Article 109j(1) of the EC Treaty, to be released by 25 March 1998.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0059/98 by Ian White (PSE) to the Commission (29 January 1998)

Subject: Extremely low frequency radio waves

Since the demise of the Soviet Union, it would appear that some extremely low frequency radio transmitters have continued to operate, some from applicant countries to the European Union. Is the Commission aware of such continuing transmission, and has any monitoring of frequency and field strength taken place?

Is the Commission aware of any research that has been carried out, is being carried out or is to be carried out, to determine the adverse health effects caused by cyclotron resonance connected with these transmissions?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (11 March 1998)

The Commission is not aware of the matter raised by the Honourable Member.

The Commission published in 1996 a comprehensive document on sources, exposure and health effects of non-ionizing radiation, covering extremely low frequencies, including the earth's natural magnetic field.

Risk assessment of human exposure to extremely low frequencies has also been the subject of many research activities, some of which are supported by the Community. In addition, the World health organization (WHO) coordinates a review of all internationally available studies on this topic. The Commission is an observer in this effort, and a meeting will be held in May 1998 in Moscow in order to review the science related to exposure to low and high frequency fields. The proceedings of this meeting will be published in Russian and English.

Information on the WHO project is on the internet (http://www.who.ch:programmes/peh/emf/emf-home.htm). A copy of the 1996 review document and a list of studies relating to cyclotronic resonance is sent direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0165/98 by Constanze Krehl (PSE) to the Commission (2 February 1998)

Subject: Access to aid for measures co-financed from European Structural Fund resources

Can the Commission say whether the Structural Fund Regulation provides that third-country nationals legally residing in an area covered by one of the Objectives are as a matter of principle excluded from structural fund aid?

If the Structural Fund Regulation does not so provide, does it authorize the competent national and/or regional authorities to exclude as a matter of principle third-country nationals living in the relevant area covered by one of the Objectives in their directives relating to aid for measures which are co-financed from European Structural Fund resources?

Is it therefore possible that a Polish lady, who is married to an EU citizen and lives with him in an EU country while still retaining her Polish nationality, may be denied access to European Structural Fund resources on those grounds?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (12 March 1998)

There are no provisions in the structural funds regulations which would permit the exclusion from assistance from the funds of third country nationals legally residing in an area of a Member State eligible for assistance, nor do the regulations authorize national or regional authorities to exclude third country nationals from eligibility for assistance.

The regulations do however stipulate that assistance may only be given for activities undertaken within the territory of the Community.