ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1429/96 by Reinhard Rack (PPE) to the Commission (29 May 1996)

Subject: Appointment of Austrian nationals to grades A7 and A8 - second competition for Austrian nationals

In the context of the first appointments of nationals of the new Member States there is apparently an imbalance between Finland, Sweden and Austria.

1. How many Finnish, Swedish and Austrian nationals have already been appointed to grades A7 and A8 by the Commission?

2. Will there be a further competition for grades A7 and A8 exclusively for Austrian nationals?

3. If so, subject to what general conditions (time scale and length of list) would such a competition take place?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (14 June 1996)

The most recent figures for recruitment from the new Member States at the A7 and A8 grades already made or underway are:

>TABLE>

There are still some 140 people on the A7 and A8 reserve lists for the new Member States. In addition, the Commission is participating in three competitions at the A7/A6 level for accountants and auditors which the Court of Auditors is managing. The reserve lists from these competitions, which should have a maximum of 60 in total, will be available shortly.

The derogation allowing special competitions to be held for citizens from the three new Member States applies until 1999. It is too early to say whether and when the Commission might again make use of this special legislation to launch further competitions at the A7 and A8 levels.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0787/96 by Florus Wijsenbeek (ELDR) to the Commission (1 April 1996)

Subject: VAT on telecommunications services

1. Is the Commission aware that competing telecommunications operators registered in a country outside the EU (for example, the USA) which does not apply VAT can, as a result, offer more attractive prices to users not entitled to make deductions, such as public authorities, banks, insurance companies and private individuals?

2. Is it true that the Commission believes that the rule in Article 9(1) of the Sixth Directive (determining the place where a service is supplied) is applicable to telecommunications services and that telecommunications operators registered in the EU Member States must therefore charge VAT on all their telecommunications services, regardless of customer and regardless of where the service is performed?

3. Does the Commission subscribe to the view that it cannot be the intention for the EU to place its own industry at a disadvantage, as far as VAT is concerned, compared with its competitors outside the EU?

4. If so, what action will it take to put an end to this distortion of competition as soon as possible?

5. If not, why does the Commission allow this unfair competition to continue?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (21 May 1996)

The Commission is aware that the current arrangements for the taxation of telecommunications, which are governed by Article 9(1) of the Sixth VAT Directive (77/388/EEC), ((OJ L 145, 13.6.1977. )) under which such services are taxed in the Member State in which the supplier has established his business, are no longer appropriate in view of technological developments in this area.

Since the rules place Community operators at a competitive disadvantage in some instances, the Commission has begun examining the matter through a group of experts. It has also asked for the subject to be discussed by an expert group within the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

On the basis of the conclusions drawn from such discussions, the Commission expects to put forward new rules on the place at which VAT is charged on telecommunications by the end of the year. The new rules should ensure that, under the common system of value added tax, any service of this kind provided within the Community is subject to tax.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0723/96 by Gerard Collins (UPE) to the Commission (26 March 1996)

Subject: Structural Funds

In the light of the paper presented to the Informal Council of Ministers responsible for regional policy and spatial planning, held in Madrid on 30 November/1 December 1995 by the Commission and, in particular, the proposal therein that the deflator be applied towards the key priorities for future development of the Structural Funds, might I ask the Commission to elaborate on how this principle was applied when negotiating the application of the deflator with the Irish authorities during 1995 and to describe the manner in which the Structural Funds expenditure in Ireland is being re-orientated to coincide with the policy objectives set out in the paper?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (15 May 1996)

During the negotiation of the Community support framework (CSF) for Ireland for the period 1994-1999, it was agreed that 'the projected levels of activity and the objectives set out in the operational programmes under the CSF and Community initiatives have been determined on the basis that indexation will apply to each programme. Accordingly, the Monitoring Committee will, as a general rule, apply the additional financial resources generated by indexation to each programme on a pro rata basis, provided it is progressing at a satisfactory rate and in accordance with the objectives laid down'.

With regard to the application of the 1995 deflator the Commission agreed to a pro rata distribution within the CSF to individual operational programmes. It was then a matter for individual operational programme monitoring committees to decide how to distribute the additional funds between the various priorities within these programmes. In the case of the industrial development programme, for example, some of the additional resources were allocated to new measures following on from the recommendations of the Irish government's science, technology and innovation advisory committee (STIAC).

The Commission and the Irish authorities will continue to review performance of individual programmes within the CSF. Moreover, structural fund spending will be subject to a mid-term review which will commence during the second half of 1996. One of the items to be considered as part of this review will be the manner in which the Commission's proposals to the informal meeting of ministers in Madrid on 30 November 1995-1 December 1995 (subsequently presented to the Council and Parliament as a communication ((COM(96) 109 ))) might be built into the CSF for Ireland over the period to 1999.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1303/96 by Johanna Maij-Weggen (PPE) to the Commission (31 May 1996)

Subject: Charge for the European passport and its period of validity

Complaints by Dutch citizens reveal that charges for passports and their period of validity differ in the various EU countries.

1. Can the Commission indicate what each EU Member State now charges for the European passport and how long it is valid in each EU country?

2. Does the Commission appreciate that the citizens of Europe are rather annoyed about the differences in charges for the European passport and in its period of validity, and is it prepared to propose to the Council that the charges and periods of validity should be harmonized, so that it is not just the cover of the passport that is European?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (25 June 1996)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1060/96 by Carlos Robles Piquer (PPE) to the Commission (13 May 1996)

Subject: Appeals against the use of the name 'Euro' for the single currency

Can the Commission confirm whether the Court of First Instance has in fact received an appeal against the change in the name of the single currency from 'Ecu' to 'Euro', mentioned in Paris last January by Mr Spitzer and based on an alleged infringement of the Maastricht Treaty?

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission (10 June 1996)

As far as the Commission is aware, no appeal has been lodged with the Court of First Instance or with the Court of Justice against the choice of the name 'euro' for the single currency.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0766/96 by Thomas Megahy (PSE) to the Commission (1 April 1996)

Subject: Corruption scandal in Taiwan in 1992/1993

1. Is the Commission aware of an immense corruption scandal (Kaohsiung Refinery) that occurred in Taiwan in 1992/93 involving the state-owned companies CPC (Chinese Petroleum Corporation) and Tang Eng Iron Works Co (TE) and their respective managements?

2. Is it known to the Commission that any moment now a major sequel to that corruption scandal may erupt, regarding the use by and on behalf of CPC of designs that CPC, in collusion with TE, obtained from a subcontractor, while continuously refusing compensation, to the detriment of EU constituents? Such behaviour is unacceptable, all the more so for state-owned companies, and borders on embezzlement.

3. Does the Commission agree that, in accordance with the recently reformulated policy towards the People's Republic of China, this unfortunate matter, which may apparently generate explosive publicity, needs to be most diligently addressed?

4. Does the Commission agree, in view of the above and with regard to internationally respected standards, that the request from Taiwan for support by the European Union in obtaining membership of the United Nations should be seriously reconsidered?

Answer given by Sir Leon Brittan on behalf of the Commission (2 May 1996)

The Commission is grateful to the Honourable Member for drawing its attention to the matters raised in the question. No representations have been received from Community economic operators on this issue. The Commission would of course be ready to look into the matter in more depth when further details are available.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0712/96 by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission (26 March 1996)

Subject: Rabies

In response to Mr Skinners' question No E-2964/95 ((OJ C 56, 26.2.1995, p. 55 )), the Commission said it would make 'suitable proposals on this matter at an appropriate time', what does the Commission define as 'an appropriate time' and how does it propose to decide when the time is appropriate?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (22 April 1996)

The system currently applied as an alternative to quarantine for traded dogs and cats has to be reviewed before 1 January 1997 in the light of developments in the rabies situation in the Member States ((Article 10, paragraph 8 of Council Directive 92/65/EEC laying down animal health requirements governing trade in and imports into the Community of animals, semen, ova and embryos not subject to animal health requirements laid down in specific Community rules referred to in Annex A (I) to Directive 90/425/EEC - OJ L 268, 14.9.1992 )). This review might be considered an appropriate time to make suitable proposals on the matter.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0913/96 by Marlies Mosiek-Urbahn (PPE) to the Commission (23 April 1996)

Subject: Approval of EU aid for the firm of Burda (Darmstadt)

Is it true that the Commission is using Community funds to support the transfer of the Darmstadt printing works of the firm of Burda, Burda-Kommunikation, from Germany to Vieux-Thann in France, although there is virtually no prospect of jobs being found in the Darmstadt area for the 600 people left unemployed as a result?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (23 May 1996)

From information sent in by the relevant national authorities, we can tell you that Burda has received none of the Objective 2 structural fund aid (1994-96) given to the employment catchment area housing the Vieux-Thann site and that no project is currently being appraised.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1365/96 by Jean-Yves Le Gallou (NI) to the Commission (3 June 1996)

Subject: Community subsidies for associations, NGOs and various bodies

For Article B7-702 (Human rights and democracy in the developing countries), can the Commission provide a full list of the associations, NGOs or other bodies benefiting from Community subsidies, together with the exact amount of such subsidies during the last financial year for which the accounts have been closed?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission (21 June 1996)

Each year a report on the implementation of the resolution of the Council and the Member States meeting in the Council on human rights, democracy and development, adopted on 2 November 1991, is published and made available to the Parliament. It contains a detailed list of the projects funded in the respective year, naming the organizations. The requested information about the heading B7-522 will easily be found in this report.

Nevertheless a list which gives an overview of the organizations with funding under the heading B7-522 in 1995 is forwarded direct to the Honourable Member and to the Secretariat General of the Parliament.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0952/96 by Viviane Reding (PPE) to the Council (29 April 1996)

Subject: Combating economic crime

At its 35th sitting, on 22 September 1995, the Committee of the Union of Financial Officials in Europe noted that in the sphere of direct taxes 'the political will to combat economic crime and the shadow economy effectively is clearly lacking in all countries'.

What measures are planned in order to deal with this unacceptable state of affairs?

Reply (16 July 1996)

The Council would remind the Honourable Member that the task of combating tax evasion is essentially the responsbility of the Member States' tax authorities.

However, with regard to the legislative measures necessary for combating international tax evasion, the Council adopted in 1977 a Directive concerning mutual assistance by the competent authorities of the Member States in the field of direct taxation ((OJ L 336, 27.12.1997, p.15. )). In accordance with that Directive, Member States may exchange any information which could enable them correctly to assess taxes on income and on capital.

Moreover, at their informal meeting held in Verona on 13 April this year, the Ministers for Finance discussed a document submitted by the Commission (('Taxation in the European Union', SEC(96) 487 final. )) which, among other things, draws attention to the need to combat erosion of the tax base resulting from the development of the underground economy. Discussions to develop the ideas contained in the above document should be continued within a Working Party chaired by the Commission and composed of the personal representatives of the Ministers for Finance.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1350/96 by Jean-Yves Le Gallou (NI) to the Commission (3 June 1996)

Subject: Community subsidies to associations, NGOs and various bodies

Can the Commission provide a full list of the associations, NGOs and bodies receiving Community subsidies under budget heading B7-406 (Aid to NGOs operating on behalf of Kurdish refugees)? Can it state the exact total of these subsidies at the close of the last financial year?

Answer given by Mr Marin on behalf of the Commission (24 June 1996)

Budget line B7-406 (formerly B7-4043) that was included with a 'pour mémoire' in the 1993 budget, was for the first time allocated 2 MECU in 1994 and, under its new description B7-406, 3 MECU in 1995. Since 1994 commitments for the following rehabilitation projects in Northern Iraq have been made on this budget facility:

>TABLE>

>TABLE>

In the 1996 budget, budget line B-7-406 was included in another chapter and renamed B7-6007. It was again allocated 3 MECU. The selection procedure for 1996 commitments is currently being finalised. Based on an analysis of the most urgent rehabilitation needs of the region and in view of the results of donor coordination, it is presently planned to allocate an average of 500 000 ECU to six non-governmental organizations projects focusing on agriculture rehabilitation, income generation and community building. United Nations agencies have not applied for funding from this budget line in 1996.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0994/96 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (26 April 1996)

Subject: Non-discrimination clause in favour of disabled people in the Treaty on European Union

Why did the Commission omit specific reference to disability in supporting a non-discrimination clause in the Treaty in its final submission to the IGC?

What are the implications for a general anti-discrimination clause, rather than one specifically linked to disability, for secondary legislation and for enforcement by the European Court of Justice, affecting discrimination faced by disabled European citizens in their everyday lives?

Will the Commission reconsider its position on this question?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (29 May 1996)

In its opinion of 28 February 1996 on the Intergovernmental Conference ('Reinforcing political union and preparing for enlargement'), ((Doc COM(96) 90 final. )) the Commission recommends that a provision banning all forms of discrimination be written into the Treaty.

A general anti-discrimination clause would have the advantage of covering all sources of discrimination, not only nationality discrimination. If it were entered in the Treaty, it would apply to disabled persons even though they were not mentioned specifically. It would be for the Court of Justice to ensure compliance with the clause as a general principle of the Treaty.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1448/96 by Christine Oddy (PSE) to the Commission (12 June 1996)

Subject: 'Black and betrayed' - TUC document on black workers' experience of unemployment and low pay 1994-1995

Is the Commission aware that the TUC published a document in October 1995 entitled 'Black and betrayed' which illustrates black workers' experience of unemployment and low pay in 1994-1995?

According to this survey, the unemployment rate for black workers (18.8%) remains at more than double the rate for white workers (8.1%); Pakistani/Bangladeshi workers have the highest unemployment rate (27.3%), followed by Afro-Caribbean (24.2%); unemployed black workers are more likely to be long-term unemployed (60% of Afro-Caribbean compared with 44% of white workers) and unemployment rates are highest amongst young black workers (over half Afro-Caribbean men aged 16-24 were unemployed).

Given these appalling unemployment rates what steps does the Commission intend to take to assist black unemployed workers in the European Union?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (8 July 1996)

On 25 October 1995, the social partners adopted a joint declaration on the prevention of racial discrimination and xenophobia and the promotion of equal treatment at the workplace. Throughout its preparatory phase, this initiative has benefitted from the Commission's support, and further support is made available to promote its implementation.

A compendium of examples of good practice is being prepared by the social partners, with the support of the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, and pilot projects to promote the development of innovative approaches are being supported by the Commission.

Moreover, the Commission has, in adopting on 8 May 1996 its communication to the Member States concerning the revised version of the Community initative 'Employment and development of human resources', created a new strand Integra which aims to improve access to the labour market and the employability of vulnerable groups. In Integra, the accent is placed clearly on meeting the specific needs of migrants and refugees who are easy victims of discrimination in the labour market due to the revival of racism, xenophobia and antisemitism. This strand will have a Community budget of 385 MECU for the period of 1994-1999.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1155/96 by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE) to the Commission (3 May 1996)

Subject: 'Intervention meat' for the unemployed

According to information I have received from the Greek Union of the Unemployed, its 250 members are not being given 'intervention meat' despite a written recommendation to that effect from the responsible directorate of the Ministry for Agriculture. The meat is allegedly going to people in employment. These complaints have also already been made to the European Union's Athens Office.

In the light of this, can the Commission intercede to ascertain what exactly is happening and will it say what corrective or preventive measures it could take to eliminate such practices?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (28 May 1996)

The scheme to distribute foodstuffs to underprivileged Community citizens from intervention stocks has become well established in the Member States since it was first introduced in late 1987 via Council Regulation (EEC) No 3730/87 ((OJ L 352, 15.12.1987. )) (as amended by Regulation (EC) No 2535/92) ((OJ L 260, 31.10.1995. )) and a Commission implementing regulation which was later superseded by Regulation (EEC) No 3149/92 ((OJ L 313, 30.10.1992. )) (as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 267/96). ((OJ L 36, 14.2.1996. ))

Each year, by 1 October, the Commission adopts an annual programme for the distribution of foodstuffs from intervention stocks, broken down by Member State and product. The Member States are then responsible for administering the scheme and deciding which national charities are to distribute the stocks. In Greece, the institution responsible is the Ministry of Agriculture.