ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0574/96 by Peter Truscott (PSE) to the Commission (1 March 1996)

Subject: Statistical Office

Can the Commission confirm the statistics within the draft DGY document 'on the state of health in the European Community' CEC/Y/F/1/LUX/13/95 which suggest that the UK is the only EU Member State with net emigration?

Would the Commission express an opinion on the asylum and immigration bill currently passing through the UK Parliament with government support and the suggested use of so called 'white list' of safe countries?

Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission (11 April 1996)

According to the most recent figures (migration statistics 1995), which relate to the years 1960 to 1993, as from 1983 there has been a continuous net immigration into the United Kingdom, amounting to 50 000 a year on average. The report on the state of health in the Community ((COM (95) 357 final. )) to which the Honourable Member refers was based on figures for the United Kingdom which have since been revised.

With regard to the proposed United Kingdom asylum and immigration bill, it would not be appropriate for the Commission to express a view on draft legislation which is still the subject of debate within the national parliament.

Concerning the concept of 'safe countries' which has been introduced in the legislation of a number of Member States during recent years, the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to written question E-46/95 by Mrs Maij-Weggen ((OJ C 175, 10.7.1995. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0769/96 by Jan Mulder (ELDR) to the Commission (1 April 1996)

Subject: Protection of geographical designation of origin for agricultural products

A list of proposals for agricultural products with a protected designation of origin and generic products was published recently. Surprisingly, the list of products with a protected designation of origin did not include Dutch dairy products - such as Gouda and Edam cheese - which have been typical of the Netherlands for centuries. These two Dutch cheeses do appear on the list of generic products, however, but this is not very logical because they have been produced in accordance with a specific method in the Netherlands since the thirteenth century.

1. What are the Commission's reasons for putting Gouda and Edam cheese on the list of generic products, while cheeses such as Danablu, Feta and Parmigiano Reggiano are given a protected designation of origin?

2. In view of the foregoing, is the Commission prepared to review its proposals so that Gouda and Edam cheese are taken off the list of generic products?

3. Is the Commission prepared to enter Gouda and Edam on the list of products with a protected designation of origin, if so requested by the Member State in question?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (30 April 1996)

The list of generic products to which the Honourable Member refers is the indicative list the Commission is required to present to the Council under Article 3 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin, ((OJ L 208, 24.7.1992. )) names which have become generic not being entitled to registration and protection under that Regulation.

To guide it in this task the Commission asked the Member States themselves to submit names of products they considered might be recognized as generic, and it therefore compiled its Article 3 list in the light not only of the relevant legislation but of the Member States' own suggestions. The names Edam and Gouda (as well as Camembert, Brie, Cheddar and Emmental) were widely canvassed, inter alia by the Netherlands itself, and are not protected by bilateral or other international agreements. Note also that in its recent judgment in the Exportur case the Court stressed the importance of looking at the situation in the Member State of origin when deciding whether a product was generic.

Presumably a Member State which regards the name of one of its products as eligible for protection would not put forward that name for inclusion in the generic list. The Netherlands authorities did, however, ask for the names 'Noord-Hollandse Edammer' and 'Noord-Hollandse Gouda' to be registered as designations of origin. These comply with the requirements of Article 17 of Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 and duly appear on the first list of geographical indications and designations of origin whose registration is proposed by the Commission.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0947/96 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission (26 April 1996)

Subject: Property owned by the City of Milan

The property owned by local authorities is a valuable asset, the usefulness of which is all too often underestimated, not only from the point of view of meeting housing demand in the various European cities, but also as a means of straightening out the financial muddles of local government in large conurbations.

The City of Milan owns some very impressive property, but detailed records have never been compiled and the buildings are being appallingly neglected. Many of the grants awarded by the EU to preserve the architectural heritage have been wasted because of the ineptitude and laxness of the city council, headed by a mayor who is also a Member of the European Parliament.

When addressing itself to conservation of historic monuments and cultural assets, will the Commission compile a list of buildings owned by the City of Milan, set up machinery to monitor the city's property market, and issue a Directive laying down clear-cut forms of regulation?

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

The Commission agrees with the Honourable Member about the importance of the architectural heritage of the city of Milan but would add that the only measures it can take to encourage the preservation of the European architectural heritage are those included in the commentary of the financial resources allocated for culture (budget line: B3.2000) in 1996 by the budgetary authorities. It is on the basis of this commentary, and waiting for the adoption of the Raphael programme, that the Commission launched recently a series of pilot actions which aim at encouraging cooperation in the field of cultural heritage through European networks and partnerships ((OJ C 67, 5.3.1996. )).

Furthermore, as the Honourable Member is aware, competence for the cultural heritage belongs exclusively to the Member States. The Commission's role is based on the principle of subsidiarity as clearly stipulated in Article 128 of the EC Treaty.

In this context, the Commission would like to inform the Honourable Member that it has no competence to deal with the points raised in her question.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0318/96 by James Moorhouse (PPE) to the Council (27 February 1996)

Subject: Use of qualified majority voting in the Council

1. On how many occasions has each Member State, by name, either abstained or voted against a proposal in the Council, on any issue subject to decision by qualified majority voting, since the entry into force of the Maastricht Treaty on European Union?

2. What is the total number of proposals subject to QMV, on which any Member State has (a) abstained, or (b) voted against, since the same date?

3. What is the total number of proposals subject to QMV on which common positions or votes to adopt have evidenced unanimity among the Member States?

Reply (1 July 1996)

Further to his Written Question No E-2479/95 (OJ No C 56, 26.2.1996, p. 20), the Council Secretariat has already sent the Honourable Member a list of all definitive legislative acts adopted with negative votes and/or abstentions during the period 6 December 1993 to 31 December 1994, indicating the delegations that voted against or abstained in each case.

In future, a list of the Council's legislative acts, with a record of the votes, will be published in the Review of the Council's Work, the 1995 edition of which is currently in preparation.

The Honourable Member's attention is also drawn to the fact that, since October 1995, pursuant to the code of conduct on public access to minutes and statements, periodic summaries are published of the definitive legislative acts adopted by the Council. These summaries include the statements for the minutes as well as the records of the votes and are forwarded as a matter of course to the European Parliament.

With respect to the number of legislative acts adopted unanimously and those adopted by qualified majority, the summaries drawn up for the last three months of 1995 reveal that, of the 73 definitive legislative acts adopted, 57 were adopted unanimously (including 8 with abstentions), 14 with negative votes and 2 with both negative votes and abstentions.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0739/96 by Caroline Jackson (PPE) to the Commission (26 March 1996)

Subject: Great apes in West Africa

Given the concern about the slaughter of great apes in West Africa, of which the Commission is already aware, will the Commission confirm that it will use its review of funding under the EDF Ecofar programme to ensure that the endangered species of the region are protected as a condition of receiving EU assistance?

Will the Commission confirm that such funding could be suspended where these conditions are not met?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission (10 May 1996)

The Commission is aware of the concern caused by the slaughter of great apes in Africa.

The first stage of the Ecofac project for the protection and rational use of forest ecosystems in Central Africa has produced encouraging results in the field of wildlife protection, particularly in the case of threatened species such as primates. The Commission feels that continuation of the programme is the most appropriate way of protecting these creatures in the more inaccessible parts of Central Africa. Discontinuing the programme would be tantamount, in the areas of operation, to sacrificing all that has been achieved to date for the protection of forest ecosystems in general and wildlife in particular.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 974/96 by Michael ELLIOTT to the Council. Visa lists



Official Journal C 280 , 25/09/1996 P. 0110



WRITTEN QUESTION P-0974/96 by Michael Elliott (PSE) to the Council (16 April 1996) Subject: Visa lists Can the Council confirm that the Council Regulation No. 2317/95 ((OJ L 234, 3.10.1995, p. 1. )) of 25 September 1995 which established a Visa list for Third Country Nationals crossing the external borders of the Member States was adopted unanimously by the European Council? Reply (27 June 1996) The Council can confirm that Regulation (EC) No 2317/95, determining the third countries whose nationals must be in possession of a visa when crossing the external borders of the Member States, was adopted unanimously, in accordance with the rule laid down in Article 100c(1) of the EC Treaty which is the legal basis for that act.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0670/96 by Gijs de Vries (ELDR) to the Commission (15 March 1996)

Subject: Suspension of the Lomé Convention

1. In which cases did the Commission decide to suspend development aid for reasons of serious violations of human rights in the country concerned? How long did each of these decisions to suspend remain in force?

2. In which cases has the Lomé Convention (I, II, III, IV) been suspended on human rights grounds, and for how long?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission (31 May 1996)

Only since the coming into force of Lomé IV, Second financial protocol, have clear procedures for the full or partial suspension by the Community of the Lomé Convention been in place. These were followed in the case of Niger.

Human rights issues have been a cause for concern since the first Lomé Convention, although the notion was formally introduced in Lomé IV. This together with other considerations, led to temporary or partial suspensions of financial and technical cooperation for a number of countries including Equatorial Guinea, Liberia, Rwanda, Togo and Uganda.

At present financial and technical cooperation with Gambia, Niger, Nigeria, Sudan and Zaire, is suspended. It should however be emphasised that the suspension does not cover humanitarian assistance and, in certain cases, projects through decentralised cooperation which benefit directly the poorest section of the population.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0716/96 by Michèle Lindeperg (PSE) to the Commission (26 March 1996)

Subject: Definition of 'refugee' under the Geneva Convention - temporary protection

The Council recently adopted a common position on the definition of 'refugee' within the meaning of Article 1(A) of the Geneva Convention.

This position contains a restrictive interpretation of persecution by third parties. It does not afford protection to persons persecuted by non-governmental groups in cases where the public authorities are involuntarily inactive.

Does the Commission intend to adopt a common means of temporary protection offering such persons a status enabling them both to be protected and to live in decent conditions in the European Union?

Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission (13 May 1996)

The Honourable Member refers to the joint position of 4 March 1996 ((OJ L 63, 13.3.1996. )) concerning a harmonised application of the definition of the term 'refugee' according to Article 1A of the Geneva Convention of 1951.

The joint position should be seen as an effort by the 15 Member States to agree on common principles for applying Article 1A in similar ways throughout the Union. The document does not attempt to change the conditions under which a Member State may or may not permit a person to remain within its territory.

The agreement specifically mentions the difficult question of persecution by third parties. By this is meant the situation where someone is threatened by an actor other than the government in the country concerned. If in such a situation a government deliberately fails to act, the joint position clearly states that this should give rise to individual examination of an asylum application for refugee status. If, on the other hand, a government involuntarily remains passive, the Member States will decide in accordance with national judicial practice whether a person will be granted refugee status or not. The document also states that asylum seekers may anyway be eligible for other forms of protection under national law. This joint position will therefore not in any way reduce the level of protection presently granted by Member States to victims of persecution by third parties.

The Commission has on several occasions pointed out the need to examine the question of granting temporary protection. Temporary protection schemes were rarely used in the Union prior to the Bosnian conflict. When that war erupted, the conditions for granting temporary protection were quickly developed in many Member States. There was, however, no time for coordination and consultation. It is therefore not surprising that the existing temporary protection schemes differ from one Member State to another. It is the Commission's view that the time has now come to take stock of the present situation and initiate a discussion on future temporary protection systems.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0854/96 by Marianne Eriksson (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (12 April 1996)

Subject: Impact of convergence

In several countries the convergence criteria designed to achieve Economic and Monetary Union have brought public sector cuts which in turn have pushed up unemployment, affecting women in particular.

Does the Commission have access to statistics showing how much unemployment, especially among women, has increased as a result of the convergence criteria?

If it does not, will it in future keep statistics on the impact of the convergence criteria as reflected in public sector cuts and higher unemployment, among women in particular?

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission (4 June 1996)

Budget consolidation is needed in most Member States, and is a part of national economic policies, regardless of the specific convergence criteria contained in the Treaty on European Union. The employment effects of budget consolidation are not confined to the apparent first-round effects of a cut in public sector spending. The derived effects from sounder public finances - lower interest rates, more private investment and employment - have to be taken into account.

It is possible to estimate these effects using macro-economic models, but it makes no sense to try to disaggregate the statistical registration of the unemployed according to criteria like this. That is why no statistics are available on issues like female unemployment due to the convergence criteria, and that is why the Commission does not intend to develop any new statistical registration along these lines.

The available statistics on unemployment and more specifically concerning female unemployment might include the 'Key employment indicators in the European Union' (Commission's Employment in Europe 1995 ((COM(95) 396. ))) and the current Eurostat unemployment data:

Unemployment rates seasonally adjusted (EUR 15)

>TABLE>

At community level and in most Member States unemployment rates for women have persistently been above those for men. In a longer perspective the relative spread between unemployment for women and men has narrowed (see table cited above). However, the most recent monthly figures are showing a highly synchronised development, with no change in the spread between the two series (see data set out above).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0494/96 by Jens-Peter Bonde (EDN) to the Commission (1 March 1996)

Subject: Transparency

Will the Commission ensure that the agendas and minutes of its meetings are made available to Members of the European Parliament and the public in all official languages?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (3 May 1996)

The Commission would remind the Honourable Member that, in accordance with its decision of 8 February 1994 on public access to its documents, ((OJ L 46, 18.2.1994. )) Members of Parliament * and indeed any member of the general public * should as a rule be allowed access to Commission documents unless this would violate the public interest, private interests or the confidentiality of the Commission's proceedings. These specific exceptions were laid down in the joint Commission-Council Code of Conduct attached to the decision referred to above.

None of the exceptions is applied automatically. Each request is given careful and individual consideration.

The second sentence of Article 7 of the Commission's Rules of Procedure of 17 February 1993 ((OJ L 230, 11.9.1993. )) states that, 'Discussions shall be confidential.' However, Commission practice with regard to its minutes and agendas has always been to find a balance between giving the public access and protecting the confidentiality of its proceedings (in accordance with the Code of Conduct).

As for the availability of agendas and minutes in all official Community languages, the Commission would inform the Honourable Member that these documents are used internally as working documents and are therefore available in the Commission's working languages only.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1265/96 by James Nicholson (PPE) to the Commission (24 May 1996)

Subject: Retirement pensions

Will the Commission list:

1. current actual rates of state-funded retirement pensions paid in each Member State of the European Union, and

2. the number of persons in each Member State in receipt of such pensions?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (13 June 1996)

The mutual information system on social protection (MISSOC) tables which are sent direct to the Honourable Member and to the Parliament's Secretariat general contain information on statutory pension rates in each Member State as of 1 July 1994. The corresponding figures for 1995 will be available in July 1996.

The Commission does not have statistics on numbers of people in receipt of different kinds of pensions in all Member States. The 1995 report on social protection in Europe (also sent direct to the Honourable Member and to the Parliament's Secretariat general), however, contains general information on pensioner numbers in the then twelve Member States.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1375/96 by Peter Truscott (PSE) to the Commission (6 June 1996)

Subject: EU-approved collection centres

How many EU-approved collection centres have been notified by the competent authorities of (a) Britain, (b) France, (c) Spain, (d) Italy, (e) Ireland, to the Commission as required by EU Directive EEC/64/432 ((OJ L 121, 29.7.1964, p. 1977. )), Article 3(8)?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (8 July 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-1035/96 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (3 May 1996)

Subject: Handynet

Will the Commission confirm that, following the reduction to funding for Handynet by Parliament in its budgetary allocation for 1996, that it has sought and obtained additional funding from ONCE for Handynet? What is the level of this funding?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (7 June 1996)

Contrary to what is suggested by the Honourable Member, the Commission has not sought or obtained additional funding in the form of sponsorship for the Handynet system from the ONCE foundation.

However, following requests expressed by Parliament when consulted about the proposal for a Council Decision on the continuance of the Handynet system ((Adopted as Decision 94/782/EC - OJ L 316, 9.12.1994. )) until the end of 1996, the Commission entrusted to a private organisation, in accordance with the rules applicable, the production, distribution and marketing of the CD ROM 'Technical aids' developed as part of the Handynet computerised information and documentation system.

In this connection, with a view to securing further external sources of financing for production, distribution and marketing, that organisation began to approach other bodies with a vested interest but not directly or indirectly concerned with technical aids. The ONCE foundation, a Spanish organisation which supports activities to promote the integration of disabled people, is one of the organisations contacted.