ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1223/97 by Jesús Cabezón Alonso (PSE) to the Commission (7 April 1997)

Subject: Aid to the Mexican Academy of Human Rights

Is it true that the Mexican Academy of Human Rights will not receive the planned European Union funding to develop its programme 'Human Rights and Democracy', intended to promote a project to observe the elections for the Governor of the Federal District of Mexico to be held in 1997?

Is it true that the attitude of the Mexican Government, which is opposed to this aid, has induced the Commission not to grant the funding?

If all the above is true, what arguments did the Mexican Government put forward and for what reasons was the Commission persuaded by these arguments?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission (12 May 1997)

The Commission thanks the Honourable Member for the interest shown in the project concerning the Mexican Academy of Human Rights.

In 1996 the Commission decided to grant financial support of ECU 340 000 to the Academy, an independent non-governmental organization of international prestige, in order to implement a civic training programme in preparation for the first elections to the post of governor of the country's capital (scheduled for July this year).

On a number of occasions, however, the Mexican authorities have expressed their firm opposition to support of this kind from the Commission; they have stated that in their view the 1991 Cooperation Agreement does not provide any legal basis for cooperation schemes of this kind.

The Commission informed the Mexican authorities that it greatly regretted this negative attitude, which made it impossible to go ahead with the project.

The Mexican authorities reconsidered their position, and proposed the financing of the electoral observation programme through the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).

The Commission is prepared to examine this proposal provided that the ultimate beneficiary of the Community's financial support is still the Mexican Academy of Human Rights and provided that the Academy gives its agreement.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1453/97 by Per Stenmarck (PPE) to the Commission (28 April 1997)

Subject: The EU and Taiwan

Taiwan has been transformed by rapid economic development into one of the world's leading trading nations. It is also a democracy which holds free elections. Many EU firms are active there and many of them are aiming use the country as a springboard from which to enter the Chinese market.

However, the EU still has no office in Taipei to promote relations between the EU and Taiwan.

When does the Commission think it will be possible to open an EU office in Taiwan?

Answer given by Sir Leon Brittan on behalf of the Commission (27 May 1997)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question P-1432/97 by Mr Dupuis ((See page 125. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1937/97 by Charles Goerens (ELDR) to the Commission (4 June 1997)

Subject: Belgian special social security contribution and cross-border workers

Belgian cross-border workers in Luxembourg continue to be liable to the special social security contribution introduced in Belgium in 1994. Whilst it is reasonable enough that this charge should apply to households in receipt of income from both Belgian and foreign sources, the liability of persons insured under a social security scheme who only have foreign-earned income but do not on that account receive additional social protection, seems highly questionable inasmuch as they come under the social security of the Member State in which they work and are required to pay their social security contributions there. Following numerous individual complaints and trade-union representations, the Belgian authorities have finally recognized that this practice could be in breach of the principles regulating double taxation and the relevant Community legislation, though they have not yet rectified their administrative procedures.

What is the Commission's attitude towards this problem?

Is this practice in conformity with Council Regulation No 1408/71, Article 13 of which stipulates that it is the social legislation of the Member State in which a worker exercises gainful employment which governs that worker's social security rights and obligations?

Is this practice not an instance of flagrant discrimination under Community legislation and case law?

If so, does the Commission not agree that Community provisions should prevail in this case and that solely the Luxembourg social legislation is applicable?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (26 June 1997)

The Commission considers that payment of the Belgian special social security contribution by Belgian cross-border workers in Luxembourg, whose situation is as described by the Honourable Member, contravenes the provisions of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 on the coordination of Member States' social security schemes ((The updated version of this Regulation was adopted by Regulation (EC) No 118/97 of 2 December 1996: OJ L 28, 30.1.1997. )).

Following the Commission's intervention, the Belgian authorities have promised to adapt their legislation to the effect that, when a worker is employed abroad and subject to the foreign social security scheme for employees, no account will be taken of the worker's foreign-earned income for determining the amount of the special social security contribution.

The Belgian law governing this matter, effective retroactively from the date of entry into force of the contested measure, will be published shortly.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1216/97 by Wolfgang Kreissl-Dörfler (V) to the Commission (7 April 1997)

Subject: EU trade policy review

The EU is to carry out a critical review of its trade policy.

What preparations is the Commission making for the report reviewing EU trade policy for the WTO, which is to be published in November?

Is the EU carrying out a study on the impact of its trade policy and of WTO rules on employment in the EU Member States and in developing countries?

Answer given by Sir Leon Brittan on behalf of the Commission (2 May 1997)

The Commission is preparing its contribution for the trade policy review which will take place in autumn 1997 and is assisting the World trade organisation secretariat in the preparation of its own contribution to the process.

The Commission will publish in the near future in European Economy a report on the most recent impact of trade and investment on employment in the Community. The Commission is furthermore considering the possibility of launching additional studies concerning in particular the impact of the Uruguay round on least developed countries.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1475/97 by Luigi Caligaris (ELDR) to the Commission (23 April 1997)

Subject: Special aid for the areas of Friuli-Venezia Giulia damaged by fire

For more than two weeks in April 1997 a huge fire swept through the Valcellina area in Friuli-Venezia Giulia, causing severe damage to the environment and destroying two thousands hectares of woodland.

Given the scale of the fire, which the Italian State has been asked to declare a natural disaster, would the Commission not agree that special aid should be provided to the communes affected, which, moreover, also suffered greatly during the floods of June 1996?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (29 May 1997)

The Commission wishes to express its full sympathy with the victims of the fire which devastated the Valcellina area in Friuli-Venezia Giulia in April 1996. The Commission is aware of the seriousness of the environmental and psychological damage suffered by the people in those areas.

The Commission would remind the Honourable Member that budget heading B4-3400 (emergency Community aid) in the 1997 budget has not been allocated the funds with which any immediate action could be taken.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0996/97 by Miguel Arias Cañete (PPE) to the Commission (17 March 1997)

Subject: Farmers in Greece

Will the Commission say how many farmers there are in Greece and how many people are directly employed in agriculture in that country at the present time?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0989/97, E-0990/97, E-0991/97, E-0992/97, E-0993/97, E-0994/97, E-0995/97, E-0996/97, E-0997/97, E-0998/97, E-0999/97, E-1000/97, E-1001/97, E-1002/97 and E-1003/97 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (2 May 1997)

Survey on the structure of farms

>TABLE>

Source: Eurostat.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1174/97 by Gianfranco Dell'Alba (ARE) to the Commission (3 April 1997)

Subject: North-South cooperation in the fight against drugs

On 22 February 1997 General Jesus Gutierrez Rebollo, who was in charge of efforts to combat drugs in Mexico, was arrested by the Mexican authorities on charges of assisting drug traffickers.

Will the Commission supply a full list of the North-South anti-drug cooperation programmes carried out in 1995, 1996 and 1997 which also involved Mexico?

Will the Commission supply a list of the Mexican nationals (public officials and private individuals) taking part in these projects and say whether the authorities responsible for combating drugs in Mexico were involved?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission (5 May 1997)

The Commission thanks the Honourable Member for his interest in the fight against drugs in Mexico.

During the period 1995 to 1997, the Commission financed one project in Mexico under the North-South cooperation programme. The project, aimed at preventing drug abuse and rehabilitating drug addicts, was started in 1995 and is still under way ('Hogar integral de juventud: Modelo communitario de prevención primaria, reducción del daño y rehabilitación psícosocial de farmacodependientes', involving a total of ECU 291 950).

The local partner for this project is a religious organization, Caritas Arcuidiocesis de Mexico. The authorities responsible for combating drugs in Mexico are accordingly not involved in the project in any way.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1035/97 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Council (24 March 1997)

Subject: Completion of the nuclear power plant in Mochovce, Slovak Republic

The pressurized water reactors Mochovce I and II in the Slovak Republic, which would be the first nuclear power plant complexes in central and eastern Europe, are to be brought up to western safety standards with EU assistance. This is a project which the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) has refused to finance because it regards the plan as unrealistic. Now the European Mochovce Consortium (EUCOM), consisting of Siemens and Framatom, has been commissioned by the Slovak energy supply company Slovenske Elektrame (SE) to complete the partly-built plant. In this connection, Siemens has applied to the German Government for a guarantee under the Hermes scheme.

1. Does the Council agree that supporting a nuclear energy policy in the Slovak Republic will impede the development of an efficient, environmentally sound energy supply system and that as a result energy consumption levels will remain high?

2. Does it agree that Austria's interests are being harmed by the involvement of France and Germany in the Slovak Republic? What kind of discussions, if any, are being conducted on this matter?

3. Does the Council know how and where the radioactive waste produced if the Mochovce plant is brought into service will be processed and stored?

Answer (16 June 1997)

The question of nuclear safety in Slovakia is being kept under constant review by the Community authorities and was recently referred to in the framework of the Association Council with Slovakia on 25 February 1997. On that occasion, the Community clearly stressed the great importance which it attaches - also with a view to the accession of Slovakia to the Union - to achieving a high level of safety in nuclear power stations and to strict cooperation to that end.

On the basis of these principles, note was taken at the meeting of Slovakia's intention of completing the Mochovce plant in accordance with internationally recognized safety guidelines, as well as of its commitment to close nuclear installations which did not satisfy these standards. With regard to the latter point, the Community side referred explicitly to the closure of Bohunice NPP-V-1 at the earliest opportunity.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0564/97 by Carlos Robles Piquer (PPE) to the Council (24 February 1997)

Subject: Elections in Pakistan

With reference to the common foreign and security policy (CFSP), can the Council say whether there is any truth in the accusations that the Pakistani political movement 'Muhajir Quami' is being persecuted by the police to such an extent that it will be prevented from taking part in the forthcoming elections, despite the assurances given by the President of the Republic, Mr Farooq Ahmed Khan Leghari, to a delegation from the movement which he received on 2 January 1997? Is this an indication that the rights of the Muhajirs, who live in the urban areas of Sindh in the south of Pakistan, are being violated rather than protected by the State?

Answer (16 June 1997)

In the report of the European Union Election Observer Group on the National and Provincial Assembly Elections held in Pakistan on 3 February 1997, the following conclusions are drawn:

The European Union Observer group, which was formed only in the last few days of the election campaign, was able to visit only a small percentage of the polling stations. The group concluded on the basis of their observations that, in general, the poll was conducted in accordance with the rules and in an equitable manner, and that the results reflected the wishes of those who voted. However serious deficiencies, in the electoral register and the identification of voters, excluded a significant proportion of those who had the right to vote. The shortcomings observed, and the serious incidents reported in a small proportion of voting stations, did not, in the view of the observer group alter the final outcome. They should, however, be object of follow-up action by the Election Commission. The observer group believe that, on the whole, voters were properly served by the elections officials. Overall, the Election Commission, their polling stations officials, the parties, the security forces and the voters contributed to a calm atmosphere and an orderly election.

Voting was conducted, in general, in a calm atmosphere. There were some serious exceptions witnessed by observers in Baluchistan Province and reported in Karachi. Overall voting procedures were orderly, with voting officials making brave efforts to ensure transparent voting procedures in frequently difficult conditions in terms of space and/or facilities available.

In Karachi, the observer teams received credible reports of serious instances of intimidation, and the possible collusion of the security forces in them. These instances appear to be targeted at preventing MQM (A) party agents from being present in certain polling stations, and discouraging MQM (A) supporters from casting their votes. The observer group believe that the authorities should carry out a thorough investigation.

The Council instances will raise these issues in their institutionalised contacts with the Pakistani Government.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0993/97 by Miguel Arias Cañete (PPE) to the Commission (17 March 1997)

Subject: Farmers in Finland

Will the Commission say how many farmers there are in Finland and how many people are directly employed in agriculture in that country at the present time?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0989/97, E-0990/97, E-0991/97, E-0992/97, E-0993/97, E-0994/97, E-0995/97, E-0996/97, E-0997/97, E-0998/97, E-0999/97, E-1000/97, E-1001/97, E-1002/97 and E-1003/97 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (2 May 1997)

Survey on the structure of farms

>TABLE>

Source: Eurostat.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0287/97 by Bernd Lange (PSE) to the Council (14 February 1997)

Subject: Situation in Nigeria

Since the adoption of the Council's joint position on the situation in Nigeria on 4 December 1995, the situation in Nigeria has not improved at all, in particular as regards respect for human rights. In its joint position the Council gave an undertaking to monitor future developments carefully and if necessary to consider what measures should be taken, including sanctions.

1. What conclusions has the Council drawn from its observations?

2. Which of the measures referred to in the joint position of 4 December 1995 will the Council adopt in order to have an immediate positive influence on the situation in Nigeria?

3. When can the adoption of a new Council joint position be expected?

Answer (2 July 1997)

The Council fully shares the concern of the Honourable Member about the situation in Nigeria. The European Union has reacted strongly to the blatant disrespect for democratic principles and Human Rights found in Nigeria.

As the Honourable Member noted, the Common Position of 4 December 1995 stated that further measures would be considered, if steps were not taken by the Nigerian authorities towards an early transition to democracy and to ensure full respect for Human Rights and the rule of law. The Council has, therefore, continued to follow the situation in Nigeria very closely, through the diplomatic representations of the Member States of the European Union on the ground, as well as in consultation with other members of the international community, including the Commonwealth, and has made known its views in an unequivocal manner to the Nigerian authorities.

While there have been some signs of efforts to observe democratic procedures, the recent charges against Nobel laureate Wole Soyinka and a number of other people, many of whom were already detained, of the recent bombings in Nigeria, show that the situation is still worrisome.

The Council at its session of 2 June 1997 decided that the Common Position on Nigeria should be renewed for a further six month period until 4 December 1997.

The EU is committed to engaging in a constructive dialogue with the Nigerian authorities, as well as supporting the civil society. It renewed its appeal for the release of all political prisoners and for the holding of free and fair elections leading to a civilian government.

The EU reiterated its wish for normal relations to be established with Nigeria and its willingness to explore how this might be achieved.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1069/97 by Giulio Fantuzzi (PSE), Fiorella Ghilardotti (PSE) and Rinaldo Bontempi (PSE) to the Commission (21 March 1997)

Subject: Dutch opposition to alteration of the arrangements for rice imports from the Overseas Countries and Territories

A proposal to amend the arrangements for rice imports from Overseas Countries and Territories was submitted by the Commission, with the support of the Irish Presidency. At present it is proving impossible to approve this proposal because, despite the agreement of the 14 other Member States, the Dutch Government is firmly opposed.

1. Does the Commission consider this situation to be acceptable?

2. What action does it intend to take to resolve the problem?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1067/97 and E-1069/97 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (30 April 1997)

The Commission believes that the current import arrangements for products originating in the overseas countries and territories (OCT) should be adjusted to ensure a balance between the development objectives of the OCT and the objectives of the common agricultural policy.

To this end, it has adopted and forwarded to the Council two draft amendments to the Decision on the association of the OCT with the Community ((Council Decision 91/482/EEC of 25.7.1991. )), the first in the context of the report on the implementation of the OCT/Community trade arrangements provided for in the Decision ((COM (93) 555 final. )), and the second in the context of the mid-term review of the Decision ((COM (95) 739 final. )). However, the Council has not yet been able to achieve the unanimous approval needed for the adoption of these proposals.

The Commission considers that work within the Council should continue in order to find a satisfactory solution to the problem as soon as possible. It regrets that in January 1997, in the absence of such a solution, it was necessary to resort for the second time (the first time was in 1993) to safeguard measures to restrict imports of rice originating in the OCT ((Commission Regulation (EC) No 21/97 of 8 January 1997 - OJ L 5, 9.1.1997 and Council Regulation (EC) No 304/97 of 17 February 1997 - OJ L 51, 21.2.1997. )).

Since these measures expired at the end of April 1997, it is planned to assess the situation before that date in order to determine if they should be extended or amended.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1793/97 by Heidi Hautala (V) to the Commission (16 May 1997)

Subject: Health risks of silicone implants

According to recent research silicone implants, generally inserted to increase the size of women's breasts, may leak silicone into the body, which can result in very serious damage to health. Silicone is also thought to migrate to the foetus in pregnant women, with serious consequences.

In the USA a number of court cases with far-reaching implications are under way against the manufacturers of silicone implants, which may result in the authorities banning such implants.

Is the Commission aware of the serious damage to health caused by silicone, and in particular of the claims that silicone may migrate to other parts of the body and to the foetus? Is the Commission considering measures to tighten the product liability of silicone implant manufacturers? Does the Commission intend to ban them?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (12 June 1997)

The Commission is conducting a detailed investigation of the problem raised by the Honourable Member and will inform her of the outcome as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1365/97 by Joaquín Sisó Cruellas (PPE) to the Commission (21 April 1997)

Subject: Common organization of the market in potatoes

European Farmers' Coordination (EFC) is asking the European Union to establish a common organization of the market in potatoes to ensure balanced market supply, a fair income for producers and remedy the sometimes excessive intensification of production. According to the EFC, the present absence of common rules governing the potato market may lead to the disappearance of this crop in many regions, especially in southern Europe, where many family-run farms are unable to cope with the necessary investments, whilst the potato-growing area in northern Europe is increasing. It points out that although production costs have been very low for several years, this has not been reflected at all in prices to the consumer and it stresses that each country organizes its own market with different degrees of intervention, which causes serious distortions on the Community market.

What does the Commission think about establishing a common organization of the market in potatoes, as requested by European Farmers' Coordination?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (7 May 1997)

The Commission is aware of the problems arising from the lack of a common organization of the market in potatoes and believes that it is essential to set one up. In a single market there is no justification for a product as important as potatoes to be regulated by uncoordinated national policies.

Accordingly, in 1992 the Commission sent a proposal to the Council for the creation of a market organization in potatoes ((OJ C 333, 17.12.1992. )). Following examination of this proposal by Parliament, the Commission sent a new, amended text to the Council in May 1993. This amended proposal did not find a majority in the Council; some national delegations were against the creation of a regime while others wanted a market organization but with a more substantial budget allocation.

The Commission believes that the proposal that it has put forward is the best possible compromise between the divergent interests of the Member States.