ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3868/97 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission (5 December 1997)

Subject: Delay in works for the Jubilee in Rome

Replying to Written Question P-1677/97 ((OJ C 21, 22.1.1998, p. 80.)) of 27 June 1997, the Commission stated that the EIB had no reason to date to doubt the ability of the promoters to carry out the activities linked to the Rome 2000 project framework agreement. Recently, however, the President of the Agenzia Romano per l'Anno Santo, Luigi Zanda, expressed concern at the serious delays by the communal authorities of Rome in carrying out the works planned for the Jubilee, despite the fact that only 780 days remain before the great event. In view of the vital importance of the Jubilee not only for the city of Rome but for Europe and the world as a whole and bearing in mind that almost 50% of the funding for the works is being provided by the EIB:

1. What is the Commission's opinion on the feasibility of completing the 500 or so works planned for the Jubilee 2000 which the EIB is helping to finance?

2. Have any funds already been paid, given that the EIB is allocating the finance for individual works and not in a single tranche?

3. Are the continual delays in the completion of the works in question by the communal authorities in Rome jeopardizing their prospects of actually benefitting from EIB funding for the Jubilee?

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission (30 January 1998)

The projects being financed by the European Investment Bank (EIB) within the framework of the Rome 2000 project were individually selected by the Bank, in accordance with its own criteria, as meeting an urgent need, viz. to improve infrastructures in Rome, and as having a significant and permanent impact on the economy. The vetting undertaken by the EIB confirmed the promoters' technical competence to carry out the projects satisfactorily.

Among the projects in the Jubilee programme, some larger-scale works require a relatively lengthy authorisation procedure. This is why the national authorities' supervisory and coordinating roles have been strengthened. The EIB resources are managed by the national authorities, who pay them out as work progresses. A summary of these disbursements is presented to the Italian Parliament every six months.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2805/97

by Mark Watts (PSE) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Refusal of ISM Safety Management Certificates

How many vessels have been refused ISM Safety Management Certificates by category in each Member State?

Supplementary joint answer

to Written Questions E-2804/97 and E-2805/97 given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(10 June 1998)

Information provided by the Member States on the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) 3051/95 on the safety management of roll-on, roll-off passenger ferries indicates that no ro-ro ferries or companies have been refused international standards method (ISM) related certificates in the Member States.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0027/98 by Christoph Konrad (PPE) to the Commission (29 January 1998)

Subject: EU humanitarian aid projects in Afghanistan

1. Is the European Union currently supporting any humanitarian aid projects in Afghanistan?

2. If so, what specific projects involving humanitarian medical aid for children are receiving support?

3. In its development aid for humanitarian projects, is the Commission cooperating with aid organizations and NGOs and,

4. if so, how does this work in practice on the spot and what are the financial arrangements?

5. What conditions must humanitarian organizations at national level satisfy to be eligible for EU funding?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (17 March 1998)

The Commission committed during the 1996/1997 period 124 MECU for humanitarian assistance in Afghanistan. It has recently approved a programme of 17 MECU for humanitarian assistance in favour of the victims of the on-going conflict in this country. The Commission has also announced the approval of emergency aid for the victims of the earthquake that affected the province of Takhar on 4 February 1998.

Commission assistance to Afghanistan is implemented by European and Afghan non-governmental organisations (NGOs), Red Cross and United Nations agencies. The aims of the humanitarian operations are to secure essential medical services in several areas in the country, strengthen social safety nets, assist the humanitarian de-mining effort and rehabilitate destroyed physical infra-structure. Priority is given to addressing the needs of women and children.

Some of the humanitarian operations have a specific objective of reducing maternal morbidity and infant mortality. The Community is funding projects for intensive feeding for severely undernourished children, assisting mother and child health centres and supporting paediatric, gynaecological and obstetrical surgical activities in various hospitals in Kabul.

Humanitarian organisations must under Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/96 of 20 June 1996 concerning humanitarian aid ((OJ L 163, 2.7.1996. )) be non-profit making autonomous organisations in a Member State under the laws in force in that Member State, and have their main headquarters in a Member State of the Community or in the third countries in receipt of the Community aid.

Account is also taken of administrative and financial management capacities, technical and logistical capacity in relation to the planned operation, experience in the field of humanitarian aid, the results of previous operations carried out by the organisation concerned and, where appropriate, previous experience in the third country involved in the humanitarian operation concerned.

As for finance, NGOs eligible for funding sign an operation contract for the implementation of a specific project and operation according to the provisions of the framework partnership contract for humanitarian aid adopted by the Commission in May 1993. This framework contract establishes the financial conditions, general and specific, applied to Community funded humanitarian projects.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0012/98 by Philippe Monfils (ELDR) to the Commission (29 January 1998)

Subject: Implementation of the 'Daphne' programme

The Commission's 'Daphne' programme, launched under a budgetary item providing ECU 3 million for action to combat abuse, lays down the criteria for projects to qualify for funding.

Can the Commission provide me with a list of the projects selected, the name and addresses of the bodies responsible for these projects, and the funds allocated to each one?

Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission (26 February 1998)

In view of the length of its answer, the Commission is sending it direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0195/98 by Helena Torres Marques (PSE) to the Commission (28 January 1998)

Subject: Projects selected under the Rafael programme

According to 'Agence Europe' (29 December 1997), the Commission selected 92 projects for the conservation and improvement of the cultural heritage under the Rafael programme, for the financial year 1997.

Can the Commission state which of the 92 projects selected concerned Portugal, and what funds were allocated to them?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (13 February 1998)

Of the 841 projects which applied for Community financial assistance under the Raphael programme, 92 were selected and a total of ECU 9 416 121 awarded.

As the system currently stands, projects are not considered in terms of which Member State the application comes from. The basis is rather whether the project is the product of cooperation based on well-founded and effective partnership with clear evidence of a European dimension. Each project is coordinated by a professional working in the field of culture and must demonstrate participation by professionals in the arts from other Member States or Associated States.

Of the projects selected for 1997, 18 involved Portuguese professionals in the field. Of these, one is a project coordinator. The project is 'Estudo da técnica da pintura portuguesa do século XVI', submitted by the Instituto José de Figueiredo in Lisbon.

The total amount allocated is ECU 948 125.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0211/98 by Katerina Daskalaki (UPE) to the Council (11 February 1998)

Subject: Overflight by Turkish spy planes of a British base in Cyprus

The Republic of Cyprus' civil aviation services and the Cypriot National Guard's radar system have recorded the overflight by two Turkish RF-4 spy planes of the British base of Akrotiri-Episkopi and then of the base of Paphos on 12 January 1998, violating Cypriot airspace for about one hour.

Will the UK presidency of the Council say whether - and how - it intends to react if such acts of provocation are stepped up in future, especially against the background of the Cyprus-EU accession negotiations?

Answer (11 May 1998)

The Council hopes that Cypriot airspace will become more peaceful in the future and that provocations will cease. It will continue to call on the parties concerned to refrain from any action that might increase tension in the region. The Union has emphasized to Turkey that aspiration to join the EU implies sharing the EU's major objectives, of which the establishment of good neighbourly relations is one.

In the event of unauthorized military overflying of British bases in Cyprus, the United Kingdom Government will bring the matter to the attention of the authorities concerned, as it has done in the past.

Regarding the negotiations for the accession of Cyprus to the European Union, the Council believes that the accession of Cyprus will help to bring about civil peace and reconciliation in the island. Progress towards accession and an equitable and viable solution will clearly further assist that process. The Council reaffirms its full support for the search for a solution through the talks currently being conducted under the aegis of the United Nations.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0548/98 by Luigi Vinci (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (19 February 1998)

Subject: Trawling regulations in Italy

Since 1990 a number of Italian shipowners have submitted requests for a Community financial contribution, via the Directorate-General for Fisheries of the Ministry for the Mercantile Marine, towards the building of certain fishing units to be used for the 'pelagic one-boat trawling' system (subject to withdrawal of other fishing vessels used for trawling). The Ministry's finance committee had already given a favourable opinion on various requests for similar funding, within the meaning of Reg. (EEC) 4028/86 ((OJ L 376, 31.12.1986, p. 7. )). In this case the Ministry gave its approval for the granting of a licence in respect of both bottom trawling and pelagic one-boat trawling. Both the Ministry and the shipowners in fact considered that the latter was basically equivalent to bottom trawling.

However, in 1996 the Ministry informed the shipowners concerned that this licence could be deemed contrary to the EEC Regulation and withdrew it accordingly.

As building work on the new vessels had already reached an advanced stage, those concerned asked for a review of the situation. The Ministry's Fisheries DG then asked for the EC's opinion, but only in respect of vessels already in use, and not those under construction which were covered by the same Community funding. The EC responded favourably, on an exceptional basis, to the Italian authorities' request and to the granting of such a licence to 'bottom trawling' only in respect of vessels already in use.

Does the EC agree that shipowners who are not covered by the 'exceptional' provisions despite being part of the same project have been unfairly discriminated against and are entitled to the same treatment as those who have obtained the licence?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (17 March 1998)

The Commission is grateful to the Honourable Member for his question but is unable, unfortunately, to give an answer of general application.

On the other hand, the Commission is willing to look into the situation of the Italian shipowners concerned on a case-by-case basis if it is sent a request to examine the individual files.

The Commission is not in a position to pronounce on specific, individually identified cases because each file is subject to different circumstances; projects have been funded in the particular and changing context of the multiannual guidance programme for Italy and the relevant national legislation, as well as in conjunction with the Community's structural policies.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0083/98 by Carlos Robles Piquer (PPE) to the Council (30 January 1998)

Subject: Fair trial for those accused of the attack on Pan Am flight 103

The US State Department has just taken out full page advertisements offering up to US$ 4 million for information leading to the arrest of Lamen Khalifa Fhimah and Abdel Basset Al-Megrahi, both of Libyan citizenship, who are accused of having carried out the brutal act which cost the lives of 270 people on Pan Am flight 103 and on British soil on 21 December 1988.

Whilst more than nine years have passed without justice having been done, and whilst the reaction of horror at this terrorist act and at that which later killed 171 people on a French civilian aircraft overflying Nigeria, which is also attributed to the Government in Tripoli, remains very much alive, the advertisement referred to is nevertheless somewhat surprising since it is common knowledge that the two accused are living in Libya and that the Government of Colonel Gaddafi refuses to turn them over to British justice, this fact having been admitted implicitly by the State Department in saying that 'The United Nations has invoked sanctions against Libya for not turning Fhimah and Megrahi over for trial'.

Can the Council explain its position and say why the European Union does not accept or back the jurisdiction of the International Court in The Hague which is surely able to deliver an impartial and just verdict on the matter?

Answer (27 April 1998)

The Council fully shares the Honourable Member's horror at the brutal terrorist attacks against Pan Am flight 103 and the French UTA flight 772 over Niger.

The Council also shares his regret that, in the case of the Lockerbie bombing, 9 years have passed without justice being done. The European Union remains determined to see the earliest possible resolution to this issue, on the basis of full Libyan compliance with its obligations under relevant Security Council Resolutions. As the Honourable Member will know, the two jurisdictions which have asserted their competence in this case are those of Scotland (UK), where the bombing took place, and of the United States of America, as the plane involved was an American carrier. There is no international criminal court at The Hague with jurisdiction in a criminal case such as this. The jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice is, in accordance with its statute, limited to the settlement of disputes between States.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0081/98 by Patricia McKenna (V) to the Commission (30 January 1998)

Subject: Non-ionising radiation

In June 1996 the European Commission published a study called 'Non-ionising radiation: sources, exposure and health effects'.

Can the Commission give details of any work it has conducted on non-ionising radiation since this report was published? Has it published any other reports relating to this topic since then?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (12 March 1998)

Since publication of the comprehensive review document on non-ionising radiation, a group of experts has provided advice to the Commission on further research into possible health effects of mobile phones. This has been taken into account in the Commission's proposal for the fifth framework programme on research. The experts' proposal was made available, and sent to interested Members of the Parliament. A copy is sent direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.

The Commission participates in the World health organisation (WHO) project on electro-magnetic field research which intends to produce an environmental health criteria document on health hazard assessment. Community research is, at present, co-ordinated under the COST programme.

The Commission, finally, has work in hand to propose in due course a Council recommendation that is intended to be of guidance for Member States which wish to take initiatives for the health protection of the general public.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0024/98 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (15 January 1998)

Subject: The Kurdish problem and the European Union

Following the recent mass exodus of Kurds into Europe, how will the Commission direct its programmes in order to provide guarantees and essential aid for Kurds in the Member States of the European Union, particularly those who have political refugee status, in view of the fact that they have also been officially recognized as belonging to a political and linguistic minority?

Answer given by Ms Gradin on behalf of the Commission (9 February 1998)

The Conclusions of the Luxembourg European Council referred to the massive influx of immigrants, in particular from Iraq ((Para. 64. )). The Council was requested to prepare and implement an action plan which would also take account of the causes of the influx, of which humanitarian aspects and human rights were an integral part. The plan outlines external relations measures to be taken by the European Union and will also contain a justice and home affairs component, covering in particular the asylum and immigration aspects. The Commission was actively involved in drawing up the action plan as it will be in its implementation.

In the case of the Kurdish asylum seekers, the Commission recalls that in 1997, for the first time, it implemented a budget heading (B5-803) to improve the reception for asylum-seekers and displaced persons on the territory of the Member States. In 1997, projects were financed which, although they were not specifically targeted at asylum-seekers of any particular nationality, are also relevant in this instance. This budget heading has been confirmed for 1998.

In the case of Kurds with refugee status, the Commission implemented budget heading B3-4113 aimed at the integration of refugees for the first time in 1997. Sixty-two projects were co-financed, most of which concerned all refugees in the Union (European level projects) or a given country or region (pilot projects). The Commission followed its usual policy of giving priority to projects which 'pay particular attention to the situation in Member States who have accepted a proportionally large number of refugees and/or with a proportionally high increase in the number of refugees.' This is the general context in which some of the projects adopted are specifically aimed at the integration of Kurdish refugees, including a project presented by the Kurdish community in Germany. The budget heading in question was confirmed for 1998, and the Commission plans to continue to give priority to projects aimed at integrating refugees in the Member States or regions where there is a significant increase in their numbers.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0053/98 by Markus Ferber (PPE) to the Commission (29 January 1998)

Subject: EU assistance for research in the Bayerisch-Schwaben region

Can the Commission provide the following information on the level of EU assistance for research and development (R and D) in the Bayerisch-Schwaben region in 1997:

1. How much assistance was provided for R and D in Bayerisch-Schwaben in 1997?

2. How much Community assistance was provided for R and D in comparable regions of other Member States in 1997, and for what measures?

3. How much assistance, broken down by types of contractor (universities, research institutes, SMEs, large-scale industry, etc.), was provided for R and D in the various German Länder in 1997?

4. How many applications for R and D assistance, broken down by types of programme and EU Member States, were received in 1997?

5. For what percentage of the applicants for R and D assistance did SMEs account in the Community and Germany in 1997?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (23 February 1998)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0255/98 by Jan Sonneveld (PPE) to the Commission (5 February 1998)

Subject: Imports of fish from third countries

Decision 97/296/EC ((OJ L 122, 14.5.1997, p. 21. )) contains arrangements for the import of fish and fishery products from a number of third countries. The list of countries satisfying the requirements laid down in this scheme was most recently updated by Decision 97/877/EC ((OJ L 356, 31.12.1997, p. 62. )), according to which with effect from 1 July 1998 no imports will be possible from countries which are not listed.

A considerable number of countries which are not listed meet the 'paper' requirements, but it appears that because of a shortage of manpower the EU is unable to verify whether this is the case.

As far as quality is concerned, even under the present arrangements the Commission has the option of giving notice of a ban on imports from one day to the next or of allowing imports under more stringent inspection conditions.

1. Can the Commission guaranteed that it will not jeopardize, because of a shortage of administrative manpower, the traditional trade flows which have satisfied the EU quality requirements hitherto?

2. If necessary, will the Commission defer the effective date of these new arrangements for those countries which have not yet been inspected?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (16 March 1998)

1. Commission Decision 97/296/EC, last amended by Commission Decision 97/877/EC, establishes the lists of third countries from which imports of fishery products are authorised. Article 3 states that Member States can continue importing bilaterally from third countries not appearing on these lists until 1 July 1998. After this date, only imports from the countries appearing on lists I and II will be authorised (55 countries).

The Commission is aware that about 108 countries, mainly African, Caribbean and Pacific states (ACP), with a total of imports of 187 191 tons in 1996, will be obliged to stop exports to the Community from 1 July 1998 until they comply with the Community requirements for fishery products. Only 33 out of these countries export more than 1 000 tons per year.

In order to minimize the impact of this measure whilst ensuring public health, the Commission has under study a number of dossiers of the countries which have applied to be on the lists. Any further applications which arrive at the Commission will be analyzed carefully. By this procedure the Commission will minimize the economic impact of the decision, as well as improving the protection of Community consumers.

2. The Commission does not intend to postpone the entry into force of this measure, as there is no guarantee that products from countries not appearing on list I and II of the Decision would meet the standards of the Community.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0234/98 by José Salafranca Sánchez-Neyra (PPE) to the Commission (13 February 1998)

Subject: Ground handling services at airports - Frankfurter Flughafen AG

Could the Commission explain the terms of the decisions taken last Wednesday with a view to ending the monopoly enjoyed by Frankfurter Flughafen AG in the provision of ground handling services?

Under what terms and for what reasons has the Commission decided that the directive on the liberalization of ground handling services at EU airports will not fully apply to Frankfurt airport's Terminal 1?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission (31 March 1998)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to decision 98/190/98, which was published in the Official Journal of the European Communities ((OJ L 72, 11.3.1998. )), in particular the 'Legal assessment' section.