ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3895/98

by Karl-Heinz Florenz (PPE) to the Commission

(4 January 1999)

Subject: Directive 81/851/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to veterinary medicinal products

Does the Commission share the view that Directive 81/851/EEC(1) on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to veterinary medicinal products needs amending in order to ensure that medicinal products may be administered to animals which are of minor importance in the food chain (in this instance, horses), should such treatment be the only treatment possible, although those products are not authorised for those animals?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(25 January 1999)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to written question 1495/98 by Mr Kindermann(2).

(1) OJ L 317, 6.11.1981, p. 1.

(2) OJ C 31, 5.2.1999, p. 42.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2369/98

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE) to the Commission

(27 July 1998)

Subject: Outcome of the bilateral meeting between the Director-General for Fisheries at the Commission and the Canadian Deputy Minister for Fisheries

Following the recent summit meeting between the EU and Canada held in Brussels on 14 May 1998, at which the Canadian authorities undertook to reconsider the extraterritorial aspects of the controversial Canadian fisheries bill C-27, a meeting was held in Brussels on 23 June 1998 between the Director-General for Fisheries at the Commission and the Canadian Deputy Minister for Fisheries.

Can the Commission report on the outcome of that meeting and, in particular, on the progress made as regards reconsideration by the Canadian authorities of the extraterritorial aspects included in the above Canadian fisheries bill C-27?

Specifically, can the Commission say whether any new commitment was given by Canada in relation to the withdrawal or modification of the extraterritorial aspects of the above bill, and to any timescale and dates set for doing so?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(18 September 1998)

High level consultations on fisheries, which were held in Brussels on 23 June 1998, offered yet another opportunity to express concern about the extraterritorial aspects of pending Canadian legislation (Bill C-27). This very same matter was raised earlier at the Community-Canada Summit on 14 May 1998, on the occasion of which the Canadian side undertook to "take another look". Furthermore, the matter was discussed in the light of the debate before the Canadian House of Commons committee on fisheries on 28 May 1998, in the course of which government officials had opposed motions which aimed at aggravating certain provisions of the intended Canadian legislation. It was emphasized that this continued to be a matter of grave concern for the Community. The Canadian side took note of the Community's demand to give this matter serious consideration.

Since then, no further developments concerning the fate of the intended Canadian legislation have become known. Deliberations on this within the Canadian House of Commons will continue in autumn after the summer recess.

The aforementioned high level consultations touched upon all relevant fisheries issues, be they bilateral or multilateral. In the latter context, discussions of topics pertaining mainly to the Northwest Atlantic fisheries organisation (NAFO) showed that many of the past difficulties have been overcome. In the bilateral context, it was agreed to promote business-to-business contacts in 1999. This aims at bringing interested people together. Furthermore, this should serve as a precursor for renewed enhanced co-operation through mutually beneficial joint ventures or other partnership relationships.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2847/98

by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission

(28 September 1998)

Subject: Update on Italian trading rules

With reference to Question E-0784/98(1) concerning the legislative decree regulating trade approved by the Council of Ministers of the Italian Republic on 16 January 1998, which provides for the total abolition of the licence for small trading concerns of up to 300m2, the abolition of the registration requirement for traders setting up business and consolidation in just two sectors, foodstuffs and non-foodstuffs, of the present 14 tables specifying types of merchandise, can the Commission say whether these measures violate the relevant Community directives and endanger free competition? In Mr Monti's reply of 28 May, the Commission stated that it was looking into the question raised. Can the Commission say what the outcome of its investigations was?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(6 January 1999)

In his question, the Honourable Member refers to his previous question No E-784/98 which dealt with four aspects.

1. With regard to the first point, the answer is no.

2. The new Italian trading rules liberalise the establishment of sales outlets of up to 250 m2 in towns with over 10 000 inhabitants and up to 150 m2 in smaller towns. This does not stop dynamic small trading concerns from cooperating with each other through joint purchasing groups or voluntary chains such as franchises in order to remain competitive in the market, as stated in the Green Paper on Commerce. It is this competitiveness which guarantees the survival of small trading concerns and thus secures employment. The regional adaptation and accompanying measures which are provided for in these rules will help support small trading concerns in their efforts to adapt to new competition.

3. In principle, the adoption of a legislative decree for the purpose of liberalisation is unlikely to constitute a restriction on competition between independent undertakings. According to the Honourable Member, the main purpose of the decree in question is to remove a barrier to entry into the retail distribution market. Leaving aside other considerations, and strictly from the point of view of competition, the removal of barriers to entry into a given market is a measure which generally has a positive impact on competition. In addition, Article 85 of the EC Treaty is in principle aimed at practices and decisions by undertakings (and not public authorities) which are liable to restrict competition between these undertakings and affect trade between Member States.

4. The new Italian trading rules aim to develop competition between small sales outlets. Insofar as they are compatible with the rules governing the freedom of establishment and the free movement of goods, as well as with competition law, the Commission has no specific remarks to make about them. It would also point out that it is the national, regional and local authorities which are responsible for regional development.

(1) OJ C 310, 9.10.1998, p. 129.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3816/98

by Concepció Ferrer (PPE) to the Commission

(22 December 1998)

Subject: Programmes and projects in the field of culture, education and youth in Catalonia

Bearing in mind the policy of transparency pursued by the Commission in relation to its spending, can the Commission say what projects implemented in Catalonia benefitted from each type of aid available in the area of culture, education and youth for the period 1994-1999?

Can the Commission further specify what amounts were finally allocated to each of the above projects?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(18 January 1999)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3467/98

by Daniela Raschhofer (NI) to the Commission

(24 November 1998)

Subject: Allocation of EU funds to Vienna (Austria)

With regard to the allocation of EU funds to the State of Vienna, can the Commission provide information as to:

1. the total amount of EU structural fund appropriations provided, with a breakdown by fund and by individual Community programme and/or initiative, and the amount of EU funds charged to other budgetary headings and disbursed since 1995 for pilot projects and other measures or as direct payments to research institutes, universities, undertakings and other bodies in the State of Vienna;

2. the number of jobs created or saved with the help of these funds?

Joint answer

to Written Questions E-3459/98, E-3460/98, E-3461/98, E-3462/98,E-3463/98, E-3464/98, E-3465/98, E-3466/98 and E-3467/98 given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(19 January 1999)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3341/98

by Robin Teverson (ELDR) to the Commission

(16 November 1998)

Subject: Commission Communication on Entrepreneurship

This Communication (COM(98) 222 final) sets out many laudable proposals to assist entrepreneurship in the European Union, but a large number of new businesses will be faced with another problem which is not referred to in the priorities - counterfeiting. Does the Commission intend to include this unfortunate aspect of entrepreneurship in any promotional strategy to assist businesses in tackling this problem? Will assistance, either in the form of funding or advice, be made available with a view to helping those smaller businesses which do not have the same financial means as larger firms to tackle counterfeiting?

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission

(5 January 1999)

While counterfeiting is not specifically mentioned in the communication "Fostering entrepreneurship in Europe: priorities for the future", the Commission is aware of the negative impact of counterfeiting on entrepreneurship, innovation and competitiveness. Therefore, it has recently published a green paper on combating counterfeiting and piracy in the single market(1). This will mark the start of a wide-ranging consultation of all the parties concerned, including businesses, the Member States and the institutions of the Community.

This consultation aims to determine the economic impact of counterfeiting and piracy in the single market, to assess the effectiveness of the relevant legislation and to propose a number of initiatives to improve the situation. These initiatives could include support for private-sector monitoring, legal protection of security and authentication devices, assessment of the penalties and other means of enforcing intellectual property rights and the setting-up of suitable administrative co-operation arrangements between the relevant national authorities.

As counterfeiting and piracy affect a wide variety of sectors (including computing, toys, textiles, perfumes, compact disks, medicines, and watches), a horizontal initiative could prove a useful approach to deal with it in a comprehensive way. For the single market this would also complement the existing mechanism for controlling counterfeit and pirate products at the external border of the Community, and would thereby reinforce the coherence of Community action.

Without prejudging what the outcome of the consultation process might be, actions to be undertaken by the Commission could be of a legislative nature or consist in financial support to anti-counterfeiting activities, in organisational or administrative measures or in facilitating measures. This could also include assistance, either in the form of advice or funding, under certain circumstances, to small businesses.

(1) COM(98) 569 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-3186/98

by Jan Lagendijk (V) to the Commission

(16 October 1998)

Subject: Parliamentary scrutiny of decisions under Title IIIA of the Treaty of Amsterdam

Is the Commission aware that the Netherlands Second Chamber is considering declaring in the law approving the Treaty of Amsterdam that the present requirement of the assent of the States-General, applying to all decisions under Title VI of the EU Treaty that are legally binding on the Kingdom, will also apply to decisions taken under the provisions of Title IIIA of the EC Treaty on which (and provided that) the European Parliament has not obtained the right of codecision, in order to prevent any increase in the democratic deficit in such fields as immigration and asylum policy?(1)

As guardian of the Treaties, does the Commission agree with the Netherlands Government that "any expansion of assent to include (titles of) the EC Treaty would run into [...] difficulties in European law"(2), or does it welcome any move by national parliaments to take responsibility for parliamentary scrutiny of European policy where the European Parliament's powers are not sufficient?

If the former, what difficulties does the Commission foresee?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(17 November 1998)

Under Article 146 of the EC Treaty, the Council consists of a representative of each Member State at ministerial level, authorised to commit the government of that Member State. Each Member State is entitled to lay down its own rules and procedures which determine the position to be adopted by that representative in the Council. It is not for the Commission to judge these rules and procedures.

(1) Second Chamber, 1996-1997 parliamentary term, motion 21 501-058, No 20 by De Hoop Scheffer and Rosenmöller (adjourned), and Second Chamber, 1997-1998 parliamentary term, 25 922 (R1613), No 4.

(2) Second Chamber, 1997 parliamentary term, 25 922 (R1613), No 5, p. 2.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2874/98

by Jean-Yves Le Gallou (NI) to the Commission

(28 September 1998)

Subject: Action on illegal and harmful content on the Internet

Can the Commission define the concept of " illegal and harmful content on the Internet" contained in budget heading B5-336 of the Community budget?

Can it also specify what action it intends to take in this connection?

Finally, does the Commission envisage extending the action with regard to the Internet to the field of publishing and the book trade?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(13 November 1998)

Illegal content is sometimes thought to be synonymous with child pornography. However, illegal content comprises more. It relates to a wide variety of issues including national security (instructions on bomb-making, illegal drug production, terrorist activities); protection of minors (abusive forms of marketing, violence, pornography); protection of human dignity (incitement to racial hatred or racial discrimination); economic security (fraud, instructions on pirating credit cards); information security (malicious hacking); protection of privacy (unauthorised communication of personal data, electronic harassment); protection of reputation (libel, unlawful comparative advertising); and intellectual property (unauthorised distribution of copyrighted works, e.g. software or music).

Harmful content means both content which is allowed but the distribution of which is restricted (adults only, for instance) and content which may offend certain users, although its publication is not restricted because of the principle of freedom of expression.

The actions that the Commission intends to take are defined in the proposed action plan on promoting safe use of the Internet - Communication to the Parliament, the Council, the Economic and social committee and the Committee of the regions(1). Four action lines are proposed: creating a safe environment; developing filtering and rating systems; encouraging awareness actions and support actions.

The Honourable Member is referred to the Commission proposal for an action plan on promoting safe use of Internet. The Parliament voted on this in first reading on 2 July 1998 (A4-0234/98). Following a modified proposal by the Commission(2) and the common position of the Council on 24 September 1998(3), Parliament will examine the proposal under the co-decision procedure.

The Commission does not envisage extending the action with regard to the Internet to the field of publishing and the book trade.

The Council has also adopted conclusions on 5 October 1998 insisting on the need, in order to ensure better prevention and action against child pornography on the Internet, to have coordinated measures with regard to technical, economic, audio-visual, social, judicial and police aspects. As regards in particular the last element, the Austrian Presidency has recently proposed a draft for a joint action promoting prosecution of offences and co-operation in this area. The Commission is fully associated with this work.

(1) OJ C 48, 13.2.1998.

(2) COM(98) 518.

(3) Not yet published.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-3455/98

by Robert Evans (PSE) to the Commission

(9 November 1998)

Subject: Human rights abuses in Bahrain

Is the Commission aware of the Bahrain Government's ratification of three human rights treaties, the Convention for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (1990), the Convention on the Rights of the Child (1992), and the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel Inhuman and Degrading Treatment (1998)?

Is the Commission also aware that one of the Bahrain Government's obligations under these treaties is to submit periodic reports to the Committees monitoring their implementation?

As regards the first two treaties referred to, the Bahrain Government has, to date, failed to submit reports due in 1991 and 1994 respectively.

Can the Commission assure me that it will make every effort to urge the Bahrain Government not only to improve its human rights record but to fulfil its obligations under the treaties it has signed?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission

(2 December 1998)

The Commission follows developments in human rights, including the conventions in question, as an observer in the relevant fora of the United Nations. In this respect, the Commission associates itself with positions taken by the Union in relation to Bahrain or other countries parties to the conventions.

The Commission does not have any bilateral contractual arrangement with Bahrain. Questions concerning human rights and democracy are raised in ministerial meetings under the cooperation agreement under the cooperation agreement between the Community and the Gulf cooperation council (GCC) concluded in 1989(1). During the recent joint council meeting in Luxembourg on 27 October 1998, Community ministers reiterated their commitment to the promotion of human rights and to the principle that all human rights are universal, indivisible and interdependent.

In the context of the political dialogue between the GCC and the Community, the Commission encourages Bahrain and the other GCC countries to promote democracy and to become signatory parties to and fully apply international instruments in relation to human rights.

(1) Council Decision of 20 February 1989; 89/147/EE.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2838/98

by Niall Andrews (UPE) to the Commission

(28 September 1998)

Subject: Long-term unemployment

Will the Commission indicate what progress has been made in each EU State in tackling long-term unemployment?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(10 November 1998)

Long-term unemployment in the Community has become an increasingly difficult problem to solve. Most Member States have experienced the emergence of a hard core of unemployed with prolonged unemployment periods resulting in loss of skill and motivation. The average Community rate of long-term unemployment increased from 4,6 % to 5,2 % between 1992 and 1997. In the majority of countries, long-term unemployment ahs increased during the same period. However, some Member States have achieved progress in tackling long-term unemployment, namely Denmark, Ireland, United Kingdom and to a lesser extent the Netherlands. In all other Member States, the percentage of the labour force undergoing very long periods of unemployment has been increasing and in some cases (most notably Belgium, Greece, Spain and Italy) it has remained at very high levels (see table forwarded direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat General).

Successive European Councils meeting since Essen in December 1994 have agreed to intensify efforts in favour of groups particularly hard hit by employment. The long-term unemployed were pinpointed as one of these groups.

In 1998 Employment Guidelines, endorsed by the Luxembourg Joint Summit and subsequently adopted by the Council, two of the three Community-level operational targets deal with the prevention of long-term unemployment. They provide as an objective that every unemployed person should be offered a new start before reaching six months of unemployment in the case of young people and twelve months in the case of adults. The 1998 national action plans subsequently submitted by the Member States show for a large minority of Member States a clear shift towards prevention and activation policies with a view to tackling long-term unemployment. A more detailed description of policy tools in action and future policies to reduce the number of long-term unemployed is in the draft 1998 joint employment report.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3305/98 by Kenneth COATES to the Council. Code of conduct on arms exports



Official Journal C 182 , 28/06/1999 P. 0062



WRITTEN QUESTION E-3305/98 by Kenneth Coates (GUE/NGL) to the Council (10 November 1998) Subject: Code of conduct on arms exports Member States have yet to agree on a common list of equipment to be covered by the code. Existing national and international lists currently in use omit much of the military, security and police equipment often used in human rights abuses. Will the common list be comprehensive and include such items?
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2531/98

by Graham Mather (PPE) to the Commission

(1 September 1998)

Subject: EU funding for projects designed to benefit orphans in third countries

1. How much funding is available annually from the EU to projects designed to benefit orphans and orphanages in third countries?

2. Through which funding mechanisms is this money channelled?

3. Which third countries are involved and how much does each receive?

4. Which UK-based charities and organisations are involved?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission

(13 November 1998)

Projects financed by the Commission in developing countries may occasionally cover the specific needs of orphans, but more often they target children or young people as a whole. Such projects may be financed either from the European Development Fund (EDF) and its counterpart funds, or under specific budget headings, for example chapter B7-70 (the European initiative for democracy and the protection of human rights) and heading B7-6000 (co-financing with non-governmental organisations).

Several projects targeting children were supported in 1997 under budget heading B7-7020 (human rights and democracy in the developing countries), amounting to a total of ECU 368 060. These were: rescue and rehabilitation of girls sold into prostitution in Nepal (ECU 86 800); support for girl labourers, single mothers and children in Togo (ECU 150 000), and a programme to prevent child sexual abuse and help abused children in Sri Lanka (ECU 131 260). The latter project was run by the British NGO International Catholic Child Bureau.

Details of all projects financed under budget heading B7-6000 are given in the Commission's annual report on cooperation with NGOs.