ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2527/97 by Joan Vallvé (ELDR) to the Commission (24 July 1997)

Subject: Renewed attacks on French farmers

A lorry from Murcia was attacked near Marseilles by French farmers on 3 July 1997 - the latest in a series of acts of vandalism against lorries transporting Spanish fruit and vegetables. The French farmers threw the goods (pears, nectarines and peaches) out of the lorry after taking part in violent protests against Spanish exports of fruit and vegetables.

Given that the situation has flared up once more, does the Commission intend to take stricter measures to guarantee the free movement of goods and ensure fair competition between fruit and vegetable producers?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (5 September 1997)

The Commission firmly condemns this fresh attack on the principle of the free movement of goods. As the Commission has stated on numerous occasions, it is for the French authorities to take the public order measures necessary to prevent such exactions and an escalation of violence.

In the light of these acts, which have been repeated for too many years, the Commission has taken legal action against France in the Court of Justice for failure to fulfil its obligations. The case (C- 265/95) was heard on 10 June 1997. On 9 July 1997, delivering an Opinion favourable to the arguments put forward by the Commission, the Advocate General stated:

'Accordingly, I propose that the Court should hold that, by failing to take all necessary and proportionate measures to prevent the actions of individuals from hindering the free movement of fruit and vegetables, the French Republic has failed to fulfil the obligations arising from the common organizations of the market in agricultural products and from Article 30 of the EC Treaty in conjunction with Article 5 thereof '.

Pending the Court's final judgment, the Commission has urged the French authorities to take the preventive and repressive measures necessary to avoid a repetition of such incidents.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2397/97 by Carles-Alfred Gasòliba i Böhm (ELDR) to the Commission (10 July 1997)

Subject: Use of Cohesion Fund resources

One third of the territory of the Valencia Region is affected by serious erosion and desertification. The regional authorities allocated 1 932 million from the Cohesion Fund to combat this process in 1996.

Can the Commission supply information about the use of these resources in 1996?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (12 September 1997)

The Commission is conscious of the problems of soil erosion and desertification in many parts of Spain, including the region of Valencia. In order to help combat these problems, the Commission approved assistance from the Cohesion fund for a number of projects in 1995 and early 1996 aimed at reafforestation, forestry treatment, erosion control and the regeneration of areas damaged by fire in all the major river basins of Spain. Some projects which were presented by the Spanish authorities in 1996 were approved for assistance in July 1997. The latest decisions granting assistance might include projects located within the territory of the autonomous region of Valencia (basins of the Ebro, Jùcar/Levante and Segura).

Complementary information is sent direct to the Honourable Member and to the Secretariat general of Parliament.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2560/97 by Patricia McKenna (V) to the Commission (24 July 1997)

Subject: Euratom payments to the Sellafield nuclear complex, Britain

How much has been paid from Euratom to developments in the Sellafield nuclear complex in Combria, Britain, over the past ten years?

Can the Commission give details of the amount given in each payment and the purposes for which the payments are supposed to be used by the company running Sellafield, British Nuclear Fuels Ltd (BNFL)?

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission (15 September 1997)

Euratom extended a loan to British Nuclear Fuels Ltd. A loan agreement for an amount of USD 142 million (then countervalue of GBP 100 million) was concluded on 11-17 December 1986 to finance partially the construction of a thermal oxide reprocessing plan at Sellafield, Cumbria, in supporting the THORP fuel receipt and storage facility in 1987 (the technical description is sent direct to the Honourable Member and to the Parliament's secretariat). The loan was guaranteed by the British government. The total costs of this construction were estimated to amount to GBP 1 550 million, of which EURATOM financed GBP 100 million. The loan was disbursed on 15 January 1987 and repaid in one amount in full on 15 January 1997. Nothing is outstanding from this loan and there are currently no applications for a new loan from Euratom.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1009/97 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Council (24 March 1997)

Subject: Conflict in Rwanda/Zaire

The full-scale war which had been feared in the region of the African Great Lakes has unfortunately become a reality, with its harrowing trail of slaughters, racial hatred and tragic suffering for the helpless populations, old people, women and children.

The European Union has been unable to prevent full-scale war from breaking out, and has thus once again shown its incapacity to take a united stance on international political events.

Will the Council

1. call on those Member States with the greatest influence in that part of Africa to use this influence to convene a peace conference with a view to resolving the conflict?

2. make use of the power of such States within the United Nations to ensure that the conference takes the necessary steps to achieve a global political settlement in the region of the Great Lakes?

Answer (17 October 1997)

The Council follows closely events in Rwanda and Zaire and has discussed the situation in the Great Lakes region at every meeting since the outbreak of the conflict in Zaire. The Council does not make any distinction between its Members but expects all to do everything within their powers to implement Council decisions or conclusions. The Council has repeatedly expressed its support for the mediation efforts of the UN, OAU and regional leaders and the Special Envoy of the EU has taken active part in their mediation efforts. The Council has repeatedly expressed its support for the holding of an international conference under the auspices of the UN and the OAU to find a political settlement to the different conflicts to the region.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2055/97 by Frode KRISTOFFERSEN to the Council. Ethnic minorities



Official Journal C 082 , 17/03/1998 P. 0026



WRITTEN QUESTION E-2055/97 by Frode Kristoffersen (PPE) to the Council (18 June 1997) Subject: Ethnic minorities Does the Council of Ministers believe that the obligations on the EU Member States to protect and promote ethnic minorities should be taken into account during the imminent revision and implementation of the Maastricht Treaty? Answer (16 October 1997) The Council refers the Members of the European Parliament to the reply given to the Written Question No E-1621/97 on minority rights put by Mrs Kjer Hansen.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2385/97 by María Estevan Bolea (PPE) to the Commission (10 July 1997)

Subject: The Thermie programme

The Commission provided support - under the Thermie programme - for the first stage of the Colón-Solar project in Huelva (Spain), which consists in the production of electricity using a combination of solar heat on a large scale and gas, with the aid of new technologies.

In the context of promoting renewable forms of energy, which is one of the Commission's priorities, have Directorates-General XVII and XII made provision for supporting the second stage of this project and other similar ones?

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission (16 September 1997)

The Commission attaches a great deal of importance to the development of new technologies in the renewable energies sector.

In 1995, as part of its promotional and specific flanking action on renewable energies, the Commission financed a techno-economic study on the industrial use of thermal solar energy for the production of electricity in the Mediterranean region.

In 1996 it financed the first phase of two demonstration projects (one in Spain, the other in Greece) on the industrial use of a combination of thermal solar energy and conventional fuels to produce electricity.

With the first phase still under way and the initial results not yet available, the Commission, in agreement with the Thermie Committee, has placed the financing of the subsequent phases of these projects on the reserve list.

However, in a gesture of encouragement to the industrial sector concerned, it has granted additional support of ECU 1.2 million to the Spanish project.

Definitive funding of the solar projects will depend on the results of the preliminary work, and of a techno-economic assessment of the projects requested by the members of the Thermie Committee and due to be carried out by the end of 1997.

Lastly, a research proposal was recently submitted under JOULE (research and development). It will be evaluated according to the usual procedures and the results presented to the JOULE Committee for opinion before the Commission takes its decision, scheduled for October 1997.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1581/97 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Council (12 May 1997)

Subject: The Dublin Declaration on Employment

The Declaration stresses once more that employment is an issue of major importance. It endorses the main employment priorities decided on at Essen in December 1994, and makes specific recommendations on improving the situation of European labour markets.

Among the more vulnerable groups it includes unemployed women, unemployed youth and the long-term unemployed (although experience has shown that, without any specific reference, measures for the long-term unemployed tend to be targeted at young people).

It is deeply disappointing that older workers have not been included in the list of the more vulnerable groups requiring assistance.

Can the Council explain why this is so and whether it is possible to rectify this omission?

Answer (28 October 1997)

The Council does not agree with the Honourable Member's assertion that the situation of unemployed old workers is overhadowed in the Community's social agenda.

The Honourable Member will know that one of the issues given priority by the common strategy for employment in the European Union - which was launched at the Essen European Council meeting and confirmed and amplified in the Dublin Declaration on Employment (December 1996) - is the situation of unemployed older workers, as evidenced in the reaffirmed desire to combat long-term unemployment. This priority is explicitly indicated in the Commission's communication entitled "Action on Employment: A Confidence Pact¨ and in the Joint Report on Employment which was submitted to the European Council in Dublin in December 1996.

Lastly, in Amsterdam on 16 June 1997 the European Council adopted a Resolution on growth and employment and decided to hold an extraordinary summit in November 1997 on fighting unemployment, which should lend fresh impetus to job creation. The Commission and the Council are invited, in cooperation with the EIB, to prepare a progress report on the matter. Other European institutions, such as the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee, are also working on contributions to the debate for the extraordinary European Council meeting.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2162/97 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Council (25 June 1997)

Subject: Novel food regulation No 258/97 - Demonstrability

1. What systems are to be set up for the 'appropriate analysis'?

2. What methods will probably be used?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-2160/97, E-2162/97, E-2164/97, E-2166/97, E-2176/97, E-2178/97, E-2180/97, E-2182/97 and E-2186/97 (28 October 1997)

As specified in Article 8(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 258/97 ((OJ L 43, 14.2.1997. )), an appropriate analysis should be able, if necessary, to demonstrate that certain characteristics of a novel food or food ingredient "are different in comparison with a conventional food or food ingredient, having regard to the accepted limits of natural variations for such characteristics¨. It should also be noted that any arrangements for applying Article 8 will be adopted in accordance with the (Committee) procedure provided for in Article 13.

The questions are worded in such a way that it is difficult to identify the checks or monitoring to which the Honourable Member refers. The general provisions of Community legislation on the monitoring of foodstuffs are in any event applicable.

Regarding the assessments to be carried out under Articles 4 and 6 of Regulation No 258/97, the detailed arrangements, and notable the role of the Member States as regards the assessment bodies, are laid down in Article 4(3) and Article 6(2) to (4), supplemented, where Commission will publish recommendations concerning the scientifc aspects of the preparation of the initial assessment reports. These provisions are supplemented, where appropriate, by the relevant provisions of Directive 90/220/EEC ((OJ L 117, 8.5.1990. )).

Regarding methods of analysis, it will be recalled that Article 4 of Directive 93/99/EEC ((OJ L 290, 24.11.1993. )) provides that Member States shall ensure that the validation of methods of analysis used within the context of official control of foodstuffs complies whenever possible with certain criteria laid down in Directive 85/591/EEC ((OJ L 372, 31.12.1985. )) concerning the introduction of Community methods of sampling and analysis for monitoring of foodstuffs intended for human consumption.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2729/97 by Marianne Thyssen (PPE) to the Commission (30 July 1997)

Subject: Compensation scheme for Dutch filling station managers on the Belgian and German borders

It appears that on 23 July 1997 a scheme came into force for Dutch filling station managers on the Belgian and German borders which compensates them for the losses suffered from an increase in tax on petrol in the Netherlands.

Can the Commission say whether this scheme, which is not generally applicable to the Netherlands but is geographically restricted to the border areas, is in line with European rules on competition?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission (11 September 1997)

The scheme referred to by the Honourable Member could constitute state aid under Article 92 of the EC Treaty and should - unless it meets the criteria of the de minimis rule currently in force ((OJ C 68, 6.3.1996. )) - be notified to the Commission in accordance with Article 93(3). The Commission was not, however, aware of the scheme. It has contacted the Member State concerned and will be certain to inform the Honourable Member of the results of its enquiries.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2015/97 by Nana Mouskouri (PPE) to the Commission (11 June 1997)

Subject: Auctions on television

What is the Commission's position on the appearance on some TV channels, particularly in Greece, of programmes conducting auctions?

Does the Commission not think that such programmes may prejudice the rights and protection of consumers?

If so, does it plan to make any legal provision at European level to cover these situations or can existing Community provisions be applied effectively?

In either case, does the Commission not think there is a need for special measures to provide consumers with information in accordance with Article 129a of the Treaty?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (4 September 1997)

The Honourable Member refers in her question to a certain type of programme found in Greece. The Commission is unaware of the existence of such programmes in other Member States.

The question does not provide the necessary elements to establish clearly the type of activity in question. Should this activity be considered to be 'teleshopping' then it would fall within the scope of Directive 89/552/EC ((OJ L 298, 17.10.1989. )), as amended recently by Directive 97/36/EC (the so-called 'television without frontiers' Directive) ((OJ L 202, 30.7.1997. )). In this case, it would be the responsibility of the Greek authorities to ensure that broadcasters under their jurisdiction comply with the provisions of the Directive.

If the activity is not to be considered as 'teleshopping' then it would be subject to Greek law (relating to auctions). In this case it would be the responsibility of the Greek authorities to ensure that the broadcasters under their jurisdiction comply with Greek law.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2995/97 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (1 October 1997)

Subject: Hailstorm damage to the prefectures of Xanthi and Rodopi

During the last ten days of August, hailstorms caused major damage to seasonal crops over about 7 000 hectares in the prefectures of Xanthi and Rodopi, which were already facing serious problems.

In view of the fact that producers in the areas affected are facing financial ruin as a result of the damage caused this year in addition to that caused last year, what measures will the Commission take to ensure that they receive the necessary compensation?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-2870/97 and E-2995/97 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (16 October 1997)

The Commission expresses its sympathy to the farmers whose crops were damaged by hail. It fully understands the problems that may occur from a natural disaster of this extent.

However, it should be stressed that the Community budget is not provided with instruments to compensate losses of harvests or annual production which are in fact the most frequently observed damage that hail may cause. Nevertheless, if it were to be proved that farm buildings or livestock were affected by natural disasters, then the Commission could examine any possible request of the Member State in the context of the structural funds through an adequate re-deployment of the financial allocations of the Community support framework (CSF), following the re-direction of the priorities that the Member State should first carry out. The opportunity for this could be, for example, the mid-term review of the CSF for Greece.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2757/97 by Gerhard Schmid (PSE) to the Commission (1 September 1997)

Subject: The NASA Cassini-Huygens probe project

As part of the Cassini-Huygens project, NASA intends to fire the probe into space in October 1997 on a Titan IV rocket with a plutonium power supply.

1. Is the Commission aware of this event?

2. Is the project receiving support from European funds?

3. How does the Commission assess the mission's safety risk?

4. Will the Commission be urging the United States Administration to use hazard-free alternatives, such as solar panels?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (16 October 1997)

The Commission is aware of yesterday's launch of the United States led Cassini/Huyghens mission, intended to explore the planet Saturn over a four year reconnaissance period (Cassini), and to land the European space agency (ESA) Huyghens probe on the Titan moon of the planet.

ESA is providing the Huyghens probe (prime contractor, Daimler Benz Aerospace) as part of the interplanetary exploration element of its scientific programme. In addition, there is Italian national involvement in the main spacecraft under a bilateral agreement with the National aeronautics and space administration (NASA), the american space agency. There is no direct involvement of the Commission.

The Commission reviewed available documentation on the possible risks of the mission, arising particularly from the use, to generate the necessary on-board electricity, of radioisotope thermoelectric generators (RTGs), which rely on the heat generated by the decay of plutonium to generate the required power, and judged that the risk has been held to an acceptable level. The final launch decision was for the American authorities to take and was taken by the American President rather than at the level of NASA.

The ESA management assured the Commission that solar cells were not a possible alternative to provide power for the Cassini/Huyghens mission. This is particularly important, since it is an ESA/Italian development of solar cells that was cited both in the United States and Europe as a possible alternative to the use of RTGs.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2918/97 by Arlene McCarthy (PSE) to the Council (8 September 1997)

Subject: Inquiry into anti-dumping duties on exports of unbleached cotton from India, Pakistan, Indonesia, Turkey, China and Egypt

With regard to the new inquiry into anti-dumping duties on exports of unbleached cotton from India, Pakistan, Indonesia, Turkey, China and Egypt, would the Council please clarify why it has approved a third such inquiry so soon after the previous Commission inquiry expired - without being officially terminated - following the Council's rejection in May 1997 of the proposed duties?

The Council rejected the previous complaint as it felt duties would create more harm than good to the Community as a whole. Does the Council not appreciate that this apparently political decision to initiate a new inquiry does all harm and no good? Would the Council not agree that this new, but essentially identical, case not only threatens those parties directly concerned - by creating renewed uncertainty during the period of the complaint, with the prospect of much more drastic repercussions in the form of factory closures and heavy redundancies across the EU's textiles finishing industry and wholesale sector should the duties be introduced - but that it also wastes a considerable amount of EU taxpayers' money?

Answer (10 November 1997)

1. The Council would remind the Honourable Member that, under Article 5 of Council Regulation No 384/96 (basic anti-dumping Regulation), it is for the Commission alone to decide whether to initiate anti-dumping proceedings.

2. According to the Council's information, Eurocoton brought a complaint on 26 May 1997 in connection with imports of unbleached cotton from several non-Union countries. Following submission of that complaint the Commission, acting in accordance with Article 5 of the abovementioned Regulation, decided to initiate anti-dumping proceedings and also an investigation (the notice was published in the Official Journal of 11 July 1997).

3. It should be noted that, pursuant to Article 6(9) of the basic Regulation, anti-dumping investigations must, whenever possible, be concluded within one year. They must in any event be concluded within fifteen months of initiation.

4. The Council is awaiting the outcome of the investigation before adopting a position on the matter.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2770/97 by Mark Watts (PSE) to the Commission (1 September 1997)

Subject: Use of 6 metre headland strips

Could the Commission give advice on the possibilities for the use of 6 metre wide headland strips and field margins as part of set aside?

It appears that the current regulations governing set aside require the minimum width to be 20 metres, which in many cases means that this is not a viable scheme for many smaller farms.

Is there any possibility of the rules for set aside being changed to encompass the use of headland strips and field margins, and if so, what is the likely timescale for such changes?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (15 September 1997)

The point of the compulsory set-aside scheme is to control production of cereals, oilseeds and protein crops.

As a general rule, the land set aside is supposed to be the least productive land. The minimum width of 20 metres was chosen to avoid only field margins being used to fulfil the compulsory set-aside requirement, since they are less productive by definition.

The Commission has no intention of changing the rules on this aspect, especially since the problems of small farms referred to by the Honourable Member do not arise anyway: small producers are exempted from the compulsory set-aside scheme.