ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3066/96 by Umberto Bossi (NI) to the Commission (18 November 1996)

Subject: Translation into all official languages of the Union of the Community programme 'Training and mobility of researchers' (fourth RTD framework programme)

In its answer to my Written Question E-1255/96 ((OJ C 322, 28.10.1996, p. 45. )), the Commission attributed to 'exceptional technical reasons' the delay in the publication of the information packages on the fourth RTD framework programme in the various official languages of the Union.

I have been informed that the specific documentation pertaining to the programme for the training and mobility of researchers (the announcement of which has just been published) is to be published only in English.

The information packages concerned are as follows:

- 'Research Networks - Training and Mobility of Researchers 1994-1998 - Information Package edition 1996-1997'

- 'Accompanying Measures - Euronferences, Summer Schools, Practical Training Courses - Training and Mobility of Researchers 1994-1998 - Information Package edition 1996-1997'

- 'Marie Curie Research training Grants - ..... - Information Package 1996 revised version'.

Can the Commission therefore offer a satisfactory explanation for this arbitrary choice of language and say how this is compatible with the assurance given in the abovementioned answer that it would 'ensure that European citizens are provided with appropriate information in all the relevant languages'.

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (20 January 1997)

In the implementation of technological research and development programmes and, more specifically, in preparing documents concerning calls for proposals, the Commission pursues a policy of making the texts available to users in all Community languages.

For practical and logistical reasons it is not always possible to produce and publish the various language versions simultaneously. A delay in the availability of certain language versions is therefore not to be excluded. However, the Commission can reassure the Honourable Member that all of the texts referred to in the written question are currently available in all Community languages.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3067/96 by Umberto Bossi (NI) to the Commission (18 November 1996)

Subject: Disparities in the dates of publication in the various official languages of the EU of information packages, application forms, etc.

With reference to the incomplete answers given to my Written Questions E-1255/96 ((OJ C 322, 28.10.1996, p. 45. )) and E-2249/96 ((OJ C 11 of 13.1.1997, p. 71. )), will the Commission provide further details regarding the following points:

What specific measures will the Commission take (as called for) to avoid the disparities in the dates of publication of information relating to Community actions and programmes?

Given that the disparity in publication dates for the documentation concerned clearly disadvantages those interested in the programmes whose mother tongue is not one of the favoured languages, will the Commission say whether one of its planned measures will be to extend the deadlines for applications from these applicants?

Unless the Commission takes the step of extending the deadlines for applications whenever disparities created by arbitrary choice of languages arise, how can it ensure transparency and equality of access to its documents for citizens from all Member States?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (10 January 1997)

The Commission's policy is to publish information relating directly to competitions, calls for proposals or calls for expression of interest simultaneously, as far as it is able, in the eleven official languages. The Commission will look carefully into any instance of delay in publication in one or other language.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2484/96 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission (25 September 1996)

Subject: Use of Avoparcin for fattening

The use of Avoparcin to fatten animals is now prohibited in five Member States.

1. Can the Commission say how these countries deal with meat imports from the internal market which are contaminated by Avoparcin?

2. Can it be safely assumed in the countries in question that meat is free of Avoparcin?

If so, how is the above guarantee provided?

If not, does the Commission know how such a guarantee is to be provided in the future?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (13 November 1996)

1. If meat were found to contain avoparcin residues the health control authorities would be quite within their rights to seize the meat and withdraw it from the market, whether in a Member State authorising the use of avoparcin as an animal feedingstuff additive or in a Member State banning it.

However, that situation seems highly unlikely for, as was stated by the Scientific Committee for Animal Nutrition in its report in June 1983 (('Report of the Scientific Committee for Animal Nutrition on the use of avoparcin in feedingstuffs for calves and fattening cattle', in Reports of the Scientific Committee for Animal Nutrition, Fourth Series, Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. Report EUR 8769, cat. No CD-NK-83-010-EN-C, pp. 120-129.)), 'avoparcin added to feed was virtually unabsorbed by the digestive system of rats, chickens and pigs and [that its use in feed for chickens and pigs] does not produce any detectable residues in the tissue'. Studies performed on calves, steers and bulls under the proposed conditions and at higher doses and with the use of molecules labelled with 14C lead to the same conclusions. The conclusion of the Committee on the residue aspect in that report was that 'since the proposed use of avoparcin does not cause detectable residues in edible products, they do not entail any risk for the consumer'. More recently, the Committee confirmed those findings in its report of 29 September 1994, reconfirmed on 24 March 1995, on the use of avoparcin in feed for dairy cows ((Report not yet published.)).

2. To guarantee that meat does not and will not contain residues Member States are obliged to carry out the following checks:

- for animal feedingstuffs, to confirm compliance with the provisions of Directive 70/524/EEC on additives in animal feed ((OJ L 270, 14.12.1970.)), use of the official agar diffusion method (Directive 81/715/EEC ((OJ L 257, 10.9.1981.)));

- for meat, microbiological or thin-layer chromatography (TLC) methods which can reveal the presence of avoparcin residues.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2879/96 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (31 October 1996)

Subject: Delays in building the Athens metro

The current dispute between the government and Olympiako Metro, the consortium carrying out the work, over its demands for more state funding is continuing and threatens to delay the project further.

1. What are the specific problems that have arisen in the construction of the Athens metro?

2. Does the Commission know how much approximately the Olympiako Metro consortium is seeking in additional funds? and

3. Under the contract agreed with the Greek State, which court has jurisdiction to settle the disputes?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-2879/96 and E-2981/96 given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (3 December 1996)

The main construction problems have been caused by archeological discoveries and excavations, and by the failure of the boring machines, because of the soil conditions, to bore the tunnel at Syntagma Square and Karaïskaki Square, leading to the need to use more time-consuming tunneling methods there.

The Commission understands that the 'Olympic Metro' consortium has not so far presented a figure for a possible new cost overrun for the project. The consortium has asked for a global renegotiation of the contract (which is a turnkey contract with a lump sum price), without indicating specific issues and figures at this stage. The contract provides that Greek courts are competent for resolving disputes between the contractor and the owner of the project.

The delay has no direct effect on the other operations co-financed by the 1994-1999 Community support framework.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3623/96 by Jean-Yves Le Gallou (NI) to the Commission (3 January 1997)

Subject: Item B3-4003: European Technical Trade Union Bureau

Can the Commission give a breakdown, on an activity-by-activity, trade union-by-trade union, association-by-association or works committee-by-works committee basis, of the amount of the subsidies granted in respect of the 1995 financial year from the following item:

B3-4003: European Technical Trade Union Bureau?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-3598/96, E-3600/96, E-3603/96, E-3604/96, E-3605/96, E-3606/96, E-3607/96, E-3608/96, E-3609/96, E-3610/96, E-3611/96, E-3612/96, E-3613/96, E-3614/96, E-3615/96, E-3616/96, E-3617/96, E-3618/96, E-3620/96, E-3621/96, E-3622/96, E-3623/96, E-3624/96, E-3625/96, E-3627/96, E-3629/96, E-3630/96, E-3631/96, E-3632/96, E-3633/96, E-3634/96, E-3635/96, E-3636/96, E-3637/96, E-3638/96, E-3641/96, E-3642/96 and E-3644/96 given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (14 February 1997)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3615/96 by Jean-Yves Le Gallou (NI) to the Commission (3 January 1997)

Subject: Financing of certain associations from the Community budget

Can the Commission provide full details of the amounts granted, under the 1995 budget (taking all relevant budget headings together) to the following French trade-union organisation:

- CGT-FO/Force Ouvrière

at national level and to its branches in the regions and departments?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-3598/96, E-3600/96, E-3603/96, E-3604/96, E-3605/96, E-3606/96, E-3607/96, E-3608/96, E-3609/96, E-3610/96, E-3611/96, E-3612/96, E-3613/96, E-3614/96, E-3615/96, E-3616/96, E-3617/96, E-3618/96, E-3620/96, E-3621/96, E-3622/96, E-3623/96, E-3624/96, E-3625/96, E-3627/96, E-3629/96, E-3630/96, E-3631/96, E-3632/96, E-3633/96, E-3634/96, E-3635/96, E-3636/96, E-3637/96, E-3638/96, E-3641/96, E-3642/96 and E-3644/96 given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (14 February 1997)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3610/96 by Jean-Yves Le Gallou (NI) to the Commission (3 January 1997)

Subject: Budget heading B3-4010: Labour market

Can the Commission provide a breakdown of the subsidies earmarked in 1995, under budget heading B3-4010: Labour market

- for each activity, trade union, association and works council?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-3598/96, E-3600/96, E-3603/96, E-3604/96, E-3605/96, E-3606/96, E-3607/96, E-3608/96, E-3609/96, E-3610/96, E-3611/96, E-3612/96, E-3613/96, E-3614/96, E-3615/96, E-3616/96, E-3617/96, E-3618/96, E-3620/96, E-3621/96, E-3622/96, E-3623/96, E-3624/96, E-3625/96, E-3627/96, E-3629/96, E-3630/96, E-3631/96, E-3632/96, E-3633/96, E-3634/96, E-3635/96, E-3636/96, E-3637/96, E-3638/96, E-3641/96, E-3642/96 and E-3644/96 given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (14 February 1997)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3614/96 by Jean-Yves Le Gallou (NI) to the Commission (3 January 1997)

Subject: Financing of certain associations from the Community budget

Can the Commission provide full details of the amounts granted, under the 1995 budget (taking all relevant budget headings together) to the following French trade-union organisation:

- Confédération Générale du Travail (CGT)

at national level and to its branches in the regions and departments?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-3598/96, E-3600/96, E-3603/96, E-3604/96, E-3605/96, E-3606/96, E-3607/96, E-3608/96, E-3609/96, E-3610/96, E-3611/96, E-3612/96, E-3613/96, E-3614/96, E-3615/96, E-3616/96, E-3617/96, E-3618/96, E-3620/96, E-3621/96, E-3622/96, E-3623/96, E-3624/96, E-3625/96, E-3627/96, E-3629/96, E-3630/96, E-3631/96, E-3632/96, E-3633/96, E-3634/96, E-3635/96, E-3636/96, E-3637/96, E-3638/96, E-3641/96, E-3642/96 and E-3644/96 given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (14 February 1997)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2848/96 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Council (23 October 1996)

Subject: Nuclear industry in the Slovak Republic

1. What is the Council's view of the risk that in a neighbouring Associated country such as the Slovak Republic the difficult economic and political situation is such that an enormous increase in the financial burden involved in the reconstruction of Bohunice and the retrofitting of Mochovce could have a lasting effect on the citizens of that country?

2. To what extent are the Member States of the EU prepared to accept the losses of tax revenue if the Slovak Republic were to become insolvent if the financial burden of its nuclear policy were to become too great?

Joint reply to Written Questions E-2846/96, E-2848/96, E-2850/96, E-2852/96 and E-2854/96 (13 February 1997)

1. The Council attaches the greatest importance to the protection of the environment against the dangers of ionizing radiation. Article 80, concerning nuclear safety, of the Europe Agreement establishing the Association with the Slovak Republic stipulates that the aim of the cooperation is to provide for a safer use of nuclear energy. This aspect of cooperation covers several of the areas to which the Honourable Member refers and includes the exchange of information and experience and research and development activities.

2. The Honourable Member might also note that at the last Association Council meeting with the Slovak Republic the Community side stressed the importance of energy and, in particular, nuclear safety, for Slovakia and its role in the country's preparation for accession. The Community is strongly committed to a high level of safety in nuclear power stations and to close cooperation to achieve this. The Community stresses the need to ensure that Slovak nuclear power stations that do not conform to internationally recognized safety guidelines are shut down as soon as possible.

3. It should also be noted that the Slovak republic has acceded to the IAEA Convention (Vienna) on nuclear safety principles and has thereby subscribed to the safety requirements laid down by that Convention.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3234/96 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission (28 November 1996)

Subject: The Commission's tax programme

The Commission's work programme for 1997 (COM(96)0507) states: 'In 1996 the Commission ... launched an in-depth examination of tax policies in Europe. Practical conclusions will be forthcoming in 1997. The Commission will speed up the drafting of guidelines for closer coordination of tax policy in Europe. One of the main aims will be to reverse the current trend towards imposing compulsory charges and levies on employment.'

However, the list of proposed actions refers, as far as taxation is concerned, only to vehicle tax (34).

Is there a proposal to abolish local taxes on undertakings based on criteria other than profit, such as the Spanish tax on economic activities?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (9 January 1997)

The Commission's work programme for 1997 sets out the initiatives which it intends to take in the course of the year.

Regarding direct taxation, the programme mentions a proposal for a Directive on a common system of taxation applicable to interest and royalty payments made between companies in different Member States. The Commission will present its proposal at the beginning of 1997.

The Commission does not plan to present a proposal for a Directive to abolish local taxes on undertakings.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3625/96 by Jean-Yves Le Gallou (NI) to the Commission (3 January 1997)

Subject: Budget heading B3-1010 Youth for Europe

Can the Commission provide a breakdown of the figures, for each association and activity subsidised, for the subsidies granted in the financial year 1995, under budget heading:

B3-1010: Youth for Europe?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-3598/96, E-3600/96, E-3603/96, E-3604/96, E-3605/96, E-3606/96, E-3607/96, E-3608/96, E-3609/96, E-3610/96, E-3611/96, E-3612/96, E-3613/96, E-3614/96, E-3615/96, E-3616/96, E-3617/96, E-3618/96, E-3620/96, E-3621/96, E-3622/96, E-3623/96, E-3624/96, E-3625/96, E-3627/96, E-3629/96, E-3630/96, E-3631/96, E-3632/96, E-3633/96, E-3634/96, E-3635/96, E-3636/96, E-3637/96, E-3638/96, E-3641/96, E-3642/96 and E-3644/96 given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (14 February 1997)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1185/96 by Bartho Pronk (PPE) to the Commission (15 May 1996)

Subject: Cost and validity of passports in the European Union

1. What is the cost, in the 15 Member States of the European Union, of buying passports and identity cards valid in other Member States?

2. Are there any obvious differences in cost between the Member States?

3. If so, what can the Commission do to keep these price differences to a minimum?

Supplementary joint answer to Written Questions E-1185/96 and E-1303/96 given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (24 April 1997)

1. and 2. The Commission would refer the Honourable Members to the table below. The prices indicated relate to the situation as at 1 March 1997.

The average price of passports is ECU 47.28 and that of identity cards ECU 11. The table clearly identifies those Member States where these prices are considerably above or below average.

3. The Commission has no intention at this stage of proposing that the prices of passports and identity cards issued by the Member States to their nationals be harmonized. If, however, such a step were envisaged, for instance with a view to improving the security of these documents, the cost of obtaining them would be one of the factors it would take into account.

>TABLE>

(1) Normal price. This excludes special prices for specific groups (e.g. young persons under 18, persons over 65 and the supplement charged for rapid delivery). (2) Normal validity. This excludes special validity periods for specific groups (e.g. young persons under 18 and persons over 65). (3) a) Where passports are issued for 5 years, the price reflects the cost of renewal for a further 5 years; this provides a basis for comparison with passports issued for 10 years. b) Normal price. This excludes special prices for specific groups (e.g. young persons under 18, persons over 65 and the supplement charged for rapid delivery). c) Price of uniform passport (except for Sweden; see footnote 11). (4) Calculated using the ecu exchange rate as at 4 March 1997, published in OJ C 68, 5.3.1997. (5) a) Where identity cards are issued for 5 years, the price reflects the cost of renewal for a further 5years; this provides a basis for comparison with identity cards issued for 10 years. b) Normal price. This excludes special prices for specific groups (young persons under 18 or persons over 65). (6) Tax varying from one municipality to another. (7) Member State does not issue identity cards to its nationals. (8) Stamp duty may be added, where applicable. (9) Variation due to the inclusion of municipal tax, which is a variable amount. (10) The price is not set at national level. Under the decentralized Dutch system, prices are fixed by each municipality and are therefore subject to variation. (11) Swedish passports are not yet issued in the uniform format. The Resolution of the Representatives of the Governments of the MemberStates, meeting within the Council on 10 July 1995 (OJ C 200, 4.8.1995), set 1 January 1998 as the deadline for Sweden to start to issue the new European passports. (12) Gibraltar identity card.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3608/96 by Jean-Yves Le Gallou (NI) to the Commission (3 January 1997)

Subject: Article B5-411: Operations relating to industry

With regard to the 1995 financial year, can the Commission say, with respect to budget heading B5-411: Operations relating to industry:

1. whether associations, trade unions or employers' organizations were subsidized?

2. If so, can it specify the amount of the subsidies on an association-by-association, a trade union-by-trade union or employers' organization-by-employers' organization and on an activity-by activity basis?

Supplementary joint answer to Written Questions E-3598/96, E-3600/96, E-3603/96, E-3604/96, E-3605/96, E-3606/96, E-3607/96, E-3608/96, E-3609/96, E-3610/96, E-3611/96, E-3612/96, E-3613/96, E-3614/96, E-3615/96, E-3616/96, E-3617/96, E-3618/96, E-3620/96, E-3621/96, E-3622/96, E-3623/96, E-3624/96, E-3625/96, E-3627/96, E-3629/96, E-3630/96, E-3631/96, E-3632/96, E-3633/96, E-3634/96, E-3635/96, E-3636/96, E-3637/96, E-3638/96, E-3641/96, E-3642/96 and E-3644/96 given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (17 July 1997)

Further to its answer of 14 February 1997 ((OJ C 105, 3.4.1997. )), the Commission is now able to provide the following additional information.

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 E-3228/96 by Petrus Cornelissen (PPE) and Peter Pex (PPE) to the Commission (28 November 1996)

Subject: Discrimination against the elderly

1. Can the Commission confirm that EU citizens in the Netherlands who are not Dutch citizens are not eligible for various concessionary rates, for example on ferries and buses ((See the article in the Omlander Courant of 7 October 1996. ))?

2. To what extent does this inequality of treatment violate European rules?

3. If it is clear from the answer to question 2 that this unequal treatment violates European rules, what action will the Commission then consider to put an end to discrimination on grounds of nationality?

Supplementary answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (16 June 1997)

Further to its answer of 31 January 1997 ((OJ C 96, 24.3.1997. )), the Commission is now in a position to provide the following information.

On 4 February 1997, the Commission wrote to the Dutch authorities asking them to give their comments, within sixty days of receiving the letter, on the situation described by the Honourable Members.

In a letter dated 14 April 1997, the Dutch authorities requested a one-month extension of the deadline for replying.

As the deadline has expired, the Commission will send a reminder to the Dutch authorities.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3613/96 by Jean-Yves Le Gallou (NI) to the Commission (3 January 1997)

Subject: Financing of certain associations from the Community budget

Can the Commission provide full details of the amounts granted, under the 1995 budget (taking all relevant budget headings together) to the following French trade-union organisation:

- Fédération de l'Education Nationale (FEN) [National Education Federation]

at national level and to its branches in the regions and departments?

Supplementary joint answer to Written Questions E-3598/96, E-3600/96, E-3603/96, E-3604/96, E-3605/96, E-3606/96, E-3607/96, E-3608/96, E-3609/96, E-3610/96, E-3611/96, E-3612/96, E-3613/96, E-3614/96, E-3615/96, E-3616/96, E-3617/96, E-3618/96, E-3620/96, E-3621/96, E-3622/96, E-3623/96, E-3624/96, E-3625/96, E-3627/96, E-3629/96, E-3630/96, E-3631/96, E-3632/96, E-3633/96, E-3634/96, E-3635/96, E-3636/96, E-3637/96, E-3638/96, E-3641/96, E-3642/96 and E-3644/96 given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (17 July 1997)

Further to its answer of 14 February 1997 ((OJ C 105, 3.4.1997. )), the Commission is now able to provide the following additional information.

In view of the length of its answer, the Commission is sending it direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.