ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0503/98

by Dominique Souchet (I-EDN) to the Commission

(2 March 1998)

Subject: Prohibition on the use of driftnets

The United Nations Resolution of 22 December 1989 clearly lays down the principle that, as a precaution, " large-scale pelagic driftnet fishing" should be prohibited whatever the region or fishery.

The Community has already settled the question of the definition of large driftnet by fixing its upper limit as 2.5 km in the Atlantic and the Mediterranean by the Regulation of 27 January 1992 issued in application of that resolution.

Why does the Council wish to prohibit the use of driftnets in the Atlantic although they are already restricted to 2.5 km and it is allowing fishing with 21 km driftnets to continue in the Baltic Sea?

Does the Council believe that this measure is fair, non-discriminatory and just?
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1534/98

by Panayotis Lambrias (PPE) to the Commission

(18 May 1998)

Subject: Polluted ground water in the Attica region

A study carried out by the Athens Polytechnic for the Ministry of the Environment, Regional Planning and Public Works concludes that the ground water in Attica is, to a considerable extent, polluted and unfit for any use. The study has revealed the lack of a policy for the sustainable management of water. As an indication, it points out that only 345 of the 5 000 wells have tariffs for irrigation, while overuse causes water levels to fall substantially, seawater infiltrates into aquifers and in some areas there is a risk of landslides.

What measures will the Commission take to ensure that the Greek authorities comply with Community legislation on water and apply the principle of sustainable management and development in the water industry?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(15 June 1998)

Over-abstraction of groundwater causing intrusion of seawater and permanent depletion is increasingly becoming a problem across the Community.

In order to ensure coherence in Community water legislation and to meet the above mentioned environmental challenges, the Commission presented in February 1997 a proposal for a Framework Directive on water designed to prevent further deterioration and to protect and enhance the water quality and quantity of aquatic ecosystems and groundwaters(1).

The principle of the proposal is for water policy to focus on water as it flows naturally through river basins towards the sea, taking into account natural interaction between surface waters and groundwaters in respect of quantitative as well as qualitative aspects.

The proposal establishes a Community framework for protection of waters within a common approach with common objectives and principles and basic measures. It introduces a common principle for charging full cost recovery prices for services provided for water uses. Management plans are required for all river basins with coordinated programmes of measures to ensure good status of waters by 2010, including systematic monitoring of the effect of such programmes. Programmes of measures require that controls be set on abstraction and impoundment of water.

The water framework directive will, once adopted, ensure that Community water legislation is appropriately up-dated, firmly basing Community water policy on a principle of sustainable use with a long-term perspective for the 21st century.

(1) OJ C 184, 17.6.1997 as amended by OJ C 16, 20.1.1998 and OJ C 108, 7.4.1998.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1209/98

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

(24 April 1998)

Subject: Competitiveness

Parliament's report (A-0113/97) on the Commission Communication to the Council on benchmarking the competitiveness of European industry (COM(96) 0463 - C-0622/96) and the Commission staff working paper concerning European quality promotion policy for improving European competitiveness (SEC(96) 2000) makes the point that prices for key services are higher in Europe than in Japan and the USA and that, despite the progress made since the establishment of the single market, there are still sectors, such as distribution, to which access is restricted.

What action is the Commission intending to take in order to eliminate such restrictions?
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0551/98

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(4 March 1998)

Subject: Regional operational programme for Attiki - sub-programme 2, measure 1

Sub-programme 2, measure 1 of the regional operational programme for Attiki is concerned with transport. According to the timetable, ECU 129 583 million of the public funds earmarked for this purpose should have been utilized by the end of 1997.

1. What projects are being envisaged and what progress has been made in achieving the overall objectives?

2. If there are delays, in what areas are they occurring and what are the principal reasons for this?

3. Did any modifications occur during the CSF review and what were the budgetary implications thereof?

4. What funds had been utilized by 31.12.1997?

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

(27 April 1998)

According to the financial tables amended on 21 October 1997, public expenditure on measure 2.1 of the Operational Programme for Attiki (transport) programmed until 1997 amounts to ECU 191.32 million.

No changes were made to the regional programmes at the last meeting of the Monitoring Committee for the Community Support Framework (CSF) held on 31 October 1997.

For technical details of work programmed, progress made therein and the causes of possible delays, the Commission refers the Honourable Member to the Attiki regional authorities responsible for implementing the CSF.

Appropriations utilised at the end of 1997 amounted to ECU 182.4 million.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1463/98

by Quinídio Correia (PSE) to the Commission

(13 May 1998)

Subject: Projects submitted by the UGC [= General Union of Consumers] to the Commission

In view of its refusal to provide financial support for the consumer policy projects submitted for 1998 by Portugal's General Union of Consumers, will the Commission say:

1. What the decisive criteria used for the approval of projects were?

2. How the budget resources available were allocated amongst the various EU Member States?

3. How many (and which specific) projects for implementation in Portugal were adopted by the Commission for 1998?
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1208/98

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

(24 April 1998)

Subject: Competitiveness

Parliament's report (A-0113/97) on the Commission Communication to the Council on benchmarking the competitiveness of European industry (COM(96) 0463 - C-0622/96) and the Commission staff working paper concerning European quality promotion policy for improving European competitiveness (SEC(96) 2000) makes the point that prices for key services are higher in Europe than in Japan and the USA and that, despite the progress made since the establishment of the single market, there are still sectors, such as transport networks, to which access is restricted.

What action is the Commission intending to take in order to eliminate such restrictions?
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1394/98

by Marjo Matikainen-Kallström (PPE) to the Commission

(7 May 1998)

Subject: Rapes by the Turkish army in Kurdish areas

According to reports by various human rights organizations, gang rapes are a central element in the Turkish troops' tactics for hounding the country's Kurdish minority.

What will the Commission do to bring pressure to bear on the Turkish Government to give an exhaustive account of its troops' operations against the Kurds, in order to verify the claims concerning these appalling crimes?

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

(11 June 1998)

The Commission has received information from the Turkish Foundation for Human Rights and the Turkish Human Rights Association concerning several complaints involving rapes committed in the south-east of Turkey. According to the Turkish Foundation for Human Rights, two women have won their case at the European Court of Human Rights.

In its report on Developments in relations with Turkey since the entry into force of the Customs Union,(1) adopted on 4 March 1998, the Commission noted a lack of progress in Turkey in respect of human rights and moves towards greater democracy. In the same report, the Commission refers also to the situation in south-east Turkey, stressing the necessity of observance of the rule of law in that region, as well as the importance of reaching a civil, non-military solution to the problem.

In the more general context of relations between the Community and Turkey, the European Council, at its meeting in Luxembourg in December 1997, emphasised that a strengthening of links between the Community and Turkey would depend also on furtherance of the political reforms already begun in the country, particularly in the alignment of human rights standards and practices on those in force in the Community, and also on the question of respect for and protection of minorities.

The Commission will continue to make known to the appropriate Turkish authorities its concerns over these matters.

(1) COM(98) 147 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1671/98

by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission

(29 May 1998)

Subject: RAI International and the protection of plural information

Italian state television, in order to broadcast programmes and information to the Italian community living overseas, has for many years had a section known as RAI International which broacasts, in Italian, a selection of programmes devised in its Rome studios.

The person appointed to head this important section, which is responsible for presenting Italy's image abroad, is a party politician - the previous head of the former Italian Communist Party's propaganda unit - and, consequently, does not possess the independence of mind which should be an essential prerequisite for senior office in the public service.

The programmes broadcast by RAI International are self-congratulatory celebrations of and by the Left, with old films and programmes being transmitted at prime time while news and cultural programmes which would provide more elevating entertainment for communities abroad are relegated to less popular viewing times.

Meanwhile, the parliamentary monitoring committee which should uphold fair broadcasting standards cannot intervene for the simple reason that these programmes can be received only overseas.

Could the Commision take action:

1. to ensure that the RAI, as a public service broadcaster, broadcasts independent and pluralistic information, and

2. to urge RAI International to uphold the right to receive accurate information in order to protect Italian citizens living abroad by ensuring the information provided to them is as objective, fair, independent and pluralistic as possible.

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(10 July 1998)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to her Written Question E-3899/97(1).

(1) OJ C 187, 16.6.1998.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 239/98 by María ESTEVAN BOLEA to the Commission. Biological diversity



Official Journal C 386 , 11/12/1998 P. 0007



WRITTEN QUESTION E-0239/98 by María Estevan Bolea (PPE) to the Commission (13 February 1998) Subject: Biological diversity What role does the EU allocate to botanical gardens in connection with the implementation of its Biological Diversity Strategy, as regards both "in situ" and "ex situ" conservation? Does any initiative exist which could act as a logical follow-up to Parliament's resolution on zoos and the role which they could be assigned as part of the Community conservation policy?
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1002/98

by Gianni Tamino (V) to the Commission

(2 April 1998)

Subject: Flouting of Community legislation in the contracting procedure for the "Cispadana" road project

Following Commissioner Bjerregaard's reply to my Written Question (E-3972/97)(1) concerning the "Cispadana" road project, I should like to inform the Commission that the stage of the contracting procedure at which the bidders submit their documentation was completed on 27 February 1998 but that this procedure was not carried out by the Italian authorities (Ministry of Public Works and ANAS) in accordance with the provisions of Directive 93/37/EEC(2).

Has the Commission received the information requested from the Italian authorities and what conclusion has it reached?

Does the Commission consider that, following the latest developments in this case, there are grounds for bringing Italy before the Court of Justice for failing to meet its obligations under the Treaty, pursuant to Article 169?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(5 June 1998)

The Commission is conducting a detailed investigation of the problem raised by the Honourable Member and will inform him of the outcome as soon as possible.

(1) OJ C 196, 22.6.1998, p. 44.

(2) OJ L 199, 9.8.1993, p. 54.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1094/98

by Claudio Azzolini (PPE) and Antonio Tajani (PPE) to the Commission

(7 April 1998)

Subject: Infringement of the preamble to, and Article F of, the Treaty on European Union (Preamble to, and Article 6 of, the Treaty of Amsterdam)

Several months ago, RAI S.p.A., which is licensed to provide the Italian public radio and television service, took a disciplinary measure in the form of a "written warning" against Dr Ermanno Corsi, editor-in-chief of the Naples office of RAI and Chairman of the Journalists' Association of Campania. This measure, which was heavy-handed both in form and in substance, was intended to penalize Dr Corsi for his occasional unpaid contributions to the front page of the daily newspaper "Roma" where his "views" were published in a special column devoted to the exchange of ideas and free expression of opinions. RAI has clearly confused the performance of professional duties, for which explicit prior authorization from the company is required, and freedom of opinion, which is expressly and fully protected by Article 21 of the Italian Constitution and, as such, not subject to any censorship, authorization or control. Pointing out that the "views" which always concerned the controversy over Southern Italy, do not constitute the performance of professional duties and producing a statement from the chief editor and publisher of the "Roma" certifying that no remuneration was paid for Dr Corsi's contributions was, however, to no avail.

1. Can the Commission say whether, by restricting freedom of opinion and expression, RAI, the Italian state radio and television service, is in breach of legal and judicial principles which are universally recognized in the European Union and which form the basis of the legal orders of the Member States and of the Treaty on European Union?

2. Can the Commission also say whether it will call on the Italian Government and the Italian parliamentary watchdog committee which oversees RAI to adopt the necessary measures to prevent the infringement of a right recognized by the Italian Constitution itself and of the fundamental rights on which the European Union is based and to revoke the unjustly imposed disciplinary measure?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(20 July 1998)

Article F.2 of the Treaty on European Union imposes obligations regarding the acts and policies of the European institutions but does not confer any general or specific competence on the Union or the Community in this field (Opinion No 2/94 of the Court of Justice). The Commission therefore takes the view that there is no legal basis on which to satisfy the Honourable Member's requests.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1916/98

by Astrid Thors (ELDR) to the Commission

(9 June 1998)

Subject: Competition issues with a view to electronic and other means of payment

In view of the rapid development of means of payment, including cards and electronic facilities, when will the Commission state its position on whether the situation with regard to competition between firms providing credit card or electronic payment services is satisfactory?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(8 July 1998)

The Commission is currently finalising an examination of the rules of two major international credit card schemes, as to their compatibility to Community law. These rules were notified to the Commission in order to obtain a negative clearance or an exemption within the meaning of Article 85 of the EC Treaty. In addition to these notifications the Commission is also examining several formal and informal complaints, in particular the complaint made by the European retailers organisation Eurocommerce, directed against one or more elements of these international credit card schemes.

The Commission hopes to take a formal decision in these two cases in the second half of 1998. When the Commission has stated its views on these pending individual cases, it intends to issue shortly after a notice in which its position with regard to the main competitive issues in payment card systems will be clarified in a more general context.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1214/98

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

(29 April 1998)

Subject: Competitiveness

In Parliament's report (A-0113/97) on the Commission Communication to the Council on benchmarking the competitiveness of European industry (COM(96) 0463 - C-0622/96) and the Commission staff working paper concerning European quality promotion policy for improving European competitiveness (SEC(96) 2000), the Commission is asked to submit conclusions explaining why certain European sectors, such as drink, outperform their US and Japanese counterparts in terms of industrial added value.

When is it intending to submit these conclusions?
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1293/98

by Edward McMillan-Scott (PPE) to the Commission

(29 April 1998)

Subject: Lack of mutual recognition between Member States of vehicle MOT tests

Currently a vehicle can only be MOT-tested in the Member State in which it is registered. Given the obstacle this represents to the free movement of people:

1. Does the Commission intend to propose the standardization and mutual recognition of MOT tests?

2. What factors determine the Commission's position on this subject?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(25 May 1998)

Council Directive 96/96/EEC(1) on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to roadworthiness tests for motor vehicles and their trailers establishes minimum requirements for roadworthiness testing. Member States are free to include additional items and test to an increased severity within their national test for their own registered vehicles. Consequently, there is reluctance by those Member States with the more rigorous testing regimes to accept the possibility of their citizens gaining a roadworthiness certificate from a neighbouring Member State that operates a more lenient scheme. The Commission's current objective is to enhance roadworthiness requirements when justifiable on cost effectiveness grounds. This process will, over time, bring about a convergence of the national standards. However, until this is fully realised, mutual recognition would not be favoured by the majority of Member States.

There are bilateral agreements between Member States that permit mutual recognition in certain specified cases. This practice is not uncommon in the heavy haulage sector. However, it is not common practice with passenger cars.

(1) OJ L 46, 17.2.1997.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1555/98

by Susan Waddington (PSE) to the Commission

(19 May 1998)

Subject: Harmonization of safety standards for bicycles

It has been brought to my attention that the application for safety standards to bicycles differs widely from Member State to Member State. In certain Member States, lights must be fitted to a bicycle as a standard pre-sale fitment while in others, a front brake is not mandatory. In many Member States, bicycles are marketed as toys rather than transport.

Given that the use of the bicycle is being encouraged as an "environmentally friendly" mode of transport, and given, therefore, that the number of bicycles in use in the EU will increase, what measures is the Commission considering to harmonize product-safety standards in the growing internal bicycle market, in order to ensure that consumers are guaranteed the same minimum safety standards in all Member States?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(26 June 1998)

In contrast to two or three-wheel motor vehicles there are no Commission regulations that are intended to remove technical barriers to the trade in bicycles.

The trade circles directly involved are currently examining the suitability of sending a file to the Commission which clearly shows that such barriers actually do exist and that they prevent the free movement of bicycles within the Community. The Commission will examine that file with particular attention and, if appropriate, will not fail to put forward those measures that it feels to be most appropriate.

However, the Honourable Member's attention is drawn to Council Directive 92/59/EEC of 29 June 1992 on general product safety(1) which applies to products for which there are no specific Community safety requirements. That directive lays down, inter alia, safety criteria to be met by products placed on the market by manufacturers. It also enables the Member States to take specific action where a product constitutes a hazard to health or consumer safety.

(1) OJ L 228, 11.8.1992.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1228/98

by Marie-Paule Kestelijn-Sierens (ELDR) to the Commission

(29 April 1998)

Subject: Distance between airports and residential areas

1. Does the Commission have any data on the minimum distances from runways required by the legislation of the Member States for the granting of (a) house building permits and (b) authorization to expand the airport?

2. Does it possess data on the distances actually applied between residential areas and runways in the airports of the Member States?

3. Does the Commission have no plans to set European standards in this area so as to improve the protection of local residents and of citizens in general from noise pollution and the unpleasant smell of kerosene?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(29 May 1998)

1. The Commission does not have information concerning the minimum distance from the runway legally imposed by Member States for the purpose of planning permission on runway extension. Recommendations in this area are made by the International Civil Aviation Organisation. Such recommendations are not legally binding.

2. The Commission does not have representative data concerning the distances between runways and built-up areas, which are applied in the different Member States.

3. The Commission does not envisage the establishment of binding minimum standards in this area.

However, it intends to issue a communication on Air Transport and the Environment by the end of the year. Environmental issues arising in and around airports will be among the matters dealt with in that document.