ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-4217/97 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission (21 January 1998)

Subject: Infringement of the Directive on the award of public service contracts

1. Does the Commission know about the decision of Mantua town council of 18 November 1997 confirming the award of the contract for the design of the new Palace of Justice building?

2. Can it assess whether the procedures followed by the council contravene the provisions of Directive 92/50/EEC ((OJ L 209, 24.7.1992, p. 1. )) and Article 26 of Legislative Decree No 157/1995 implementing that directive, in view of the fact that the design contract was not put out to tender?

3. How does it intend to react to the report submitted to it by the leaders of the minority on Mantua town council?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (16 February 1998)

1. The Commission has received a complaint from the opposition members on the Mantua town council concerning the design of the new Palace of Justice building and is, therefore, aware of the town council's deliberations.

2. It is examining the documents sent in support of the complaint in order to ascertain whether the procedures followed comply with Community public procurement rules.

3. It will check whether, in this case, the conditions necessary for initiating proceedings against Italy under Article 169 of the EC Treaty for failure to comply with its obligations are met.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-4074/97 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission (14 January 1998)

Subject: Tobacco and tobacco growers

European tobacco production currently covers only about 25% of demand and any reduction thereof will simply increase the already enormous volume of imports from third countries which already meet 75% of demand in the European Union.

Current downward trends in EU tobacco production will have disastrous consequences for certain countries to the south, in particular Greece, where 70 000 families engaged in tobacco growing and 400 000 people directly or indirectly involved in the growing, processing, distribution and marketing of tobacco products will be faced with the spectre of unemployment.

Tobacco is known to account for 13% of total agricultural exports from Greece. Clearly no alternative form of agriculture production on small plots of land situated in less favoured regions could provide the families of tobacco producers with sufficient income for them to continue working the land.

What action does the European Union intend to take in response to this major problem, particularly in view of the recent decision by the Luxembourg Unemployment Summit, which clearly expressed its determination to take concerted action to reduce unemployment within the EU?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (3 February 1998)

The Commission is perfectly aware of the social and economic importance of tobacco production in Europe, particularly in Greece. It has therefore proposed in its report on the common organisation of the market in raw tobacco ((COM(96) 554 final. )) that Community aid should continue.

The aid scheme is to continue, however it will have to be radically altered to encourage production of better quality tobacco. The Commission will very shortly present to the Council and Parliament a draft Regulation making the changes envisaged in its report.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0133/98 by Katerina Daskalaki (UPE) to the Council (23 January 1998)

Subject: Murder of church sexton in Istanbul

The Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople has recently suffered a number of attacks such as the bomb attack which severely injured a clergyman. The latest target of the attacks was the font of the church of Ayios Therapon which was set ablaze by persons unknown who stole priceless icons and vessels and murdered the church sexton, V. Khavieropoulos, after a horrifying ordeal.

No-one has ever been arrested in connection with the intermittent attacks on the Ecumenical Patriarchate while the Turkish authorities do not allow the Greek Consul-General to communicate with the Istanbul local authorities to protest.

In view of the fact that Turkey has specific agreements associating the country with the EU and is required to protect Christian monuments, what measures can and will the Council take to pressure Turkey into taking steps to safeguard the monuments concerned and to protect the very few Greeks who remain in Istanbul?

Answer (30 April 1998)

The Council regrets and condemns the violent incidents mentioned by the Honourable Member, including the bombing of churches. It also notes that under the Treaty of Peace, signed at Lausanne in July 1923, the Turkish Government undertook to grant full protection to churches, synagogues, cemeteries, and other religious establishments of non-Moslem minorities.

The European Council meeting in Luxembourg on 12-13 December 1997 again underlined the necessity for the Turkish Government to meet its fundamental obligations, including the protection of minorities, which encompasses religious minorities as well. It recalled, in line with the Council position expressed at the Association Council with Turkey on 29 April 1997, that strengthening Turkey's links with the European Union also depended on that country's pursuit of political and economic reforms, including the alignment of human rights standards and practices on those in force in the EU. In this context, respect for and protection of all minorities is essential.

These issues are brought up virtually on every appropriate occasion with the Turkish authorities.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0190/98 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Council (6 February 1998)

Subject: Dual citizenship for Italians in Belgium

The Strasbourg Convention of 6 May 1963 regulates instances of dual citizenship and, in practice, provides for the reacquisition of citizenship even when it has been given up voluntarily, since it establishes that the various positions set out in international agreements remain unaffected.

Thus the Protocol to the Strasbourg Convention has, for example, made the agreements between Italy and France and Italy and the Netherlands, which allow dual citizenship, operational.

In order to remove the obstacles to freedom of movement and ensure the free movement of citizens, can the Council introduce the appropriate measures to extend the Strasbourg Protocol to cover the European countries in which there are large numbers of Italians?

Can it also, in view of the sizeable Italian community in Belgium, extend the Strasbourg Protocol, as a matter of urgency, to relations between Belgium and Italy, so as to allow the Italians living in Belgium who want to complete the formalities for reacquisition of their original citizenship, to do so, whilst keeping the Belgian citizenship which they acquired by means of voluntary naturalization?

Answer (7 April 1998)

The Council would draw the Honourable Member's attention to the fact that it is up to each Member State to determine rules for the granting of nationality. It would point out that Declaration No 2 annexed to the Final Act of the Treaty on European Union stipulates that 'wherever in the Treaty establishing the European Community reference is made to nationals of the Member States, the question whether an individual possesses the nationality of a Member State shall be settled solely by reference to the national law of the Member State concerned. Member States may declare, for information, who are to be considered their nationals for Community purposes by way of a declaration lodged with the Presidency and may amend any such declaration when necessary.'
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0192/98 by Luigi Florio (UPE) to the Council (29 January 1998)

Subject: Pluralism and freedom of expression in Turkey and Italy

On 16 January last the British presidency of the EU, having heard that the Constitutional Court of Turkey had outlawed the local Islamic party 'Refah', issued a public statement in which it said that it was concerned about the implications this decision had for democratic pluralism and freedom of expression and that the banning of the party would be examined by the European partners in the near future.

In the light of these understandable concerns about events in a country outside the EU, can the presidency say whether it does not consider it appropriate to consider, as soon as possible, the implications for democratic pluralism and freedom of expression of events which have been taking place in a country inside the EU, Italy, for about a year and a half. These events include:

1. the broadcasting authority (RAI), for the first time in its history is managed entirely by people who are exclusively influenced by the Ulivo political majority;

2. the main private television channel is headed by an eminent journalist who is a known supporter of the Ulivo;

3. the second most important private television channel belongs to an Ulivo senator;

4. all the managers of the main public corporations appointed in the last eighteen months are Ulivo supporters and a significant proportion of them came from Nomisma, a consultancy and research company founded by the current Prime Minister;

5. the school reform recently introduced by the Education Minister Berlinguer (PDS) is 'rewriting' the history of the twentieth century without mentioning Communism or any of the crimes committed by Communist regimes;

6. last year the Constitutional Court prevented a wide range of referendums from being held on the basis of purely political considerations;

7. in December last year the Commissioner Emma Bonino publicly denounced the establishment in Italy of what amounts to a 'regime'.

Answer (30 March 1998)

The declaration by the Presidency on behalf of the European Union to which the Honourable Member refers stated the Union's concern at the implications for democratic pluralism and freedom of expression in Turkey of the banning of a political party.

It should be added that it is not for the Council to comment on audiovisual media management appointments in a Member State, on Government education policy in a Member State, on the rulings of a Member State's court or indeed on statements made by a Commissioner in a personal capacity.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0014/98 by Gordon Adam (PSE) to the Council (28 January 1998)

Subject: Response of the Council to the Greenpeace paper on energy and the environment

Will the Council state what response the Luxembourg Presidency gave to the Greenpeace paper on energy and the environment, which called on:

'The EU to develop policies to limit further exploitation of all existing oil and gas reserves in the European Union and European Union territories ...

... prevent the exploitation and exploration of oil and gas in the European Union and non-European Union territories ...

... phase out the production and use of coal as an energy source.'

If the Council did not respond to this specific point, would it please do so?

Answer (7 April 1998)

The Council would point out that it does not adopt positions on documents submitted to it outside the institutional framework.

The Council would confirm that it considers the relationship between energy and the environment a matter of great importance and a key factor in energy policy choices. For that reason it has given the issue consistent consideration on the basis of the Commission's communications and proposals.

In that context it recently adopted, on 18 December 1997, a Resolution on a Community strategy to promote combined heat and power ((OJ C 4, 8.1.1998, p.1. )).

Furthermore, the Council is continuing its discussions on the basis of the Commission's White Paper on renewable sources of energy - a Community Strategy and Action Plan. At its meeting on 11 May 1998 the Council is to hold a public debate devoted to energy and the environment.

It is also giving careful study to the Commission communication on a multiannual framework programme for actions in the energy sector, which tackles all the issues relating to Community actions in the energy sphere.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0003/98 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (29 January 1998)

Subject: Pension rights for the elderly long-term unemployed

According to the National Statistical Office of Greece, long-term unemployment has soared and accounts for more than 50% of the unemployed. One particular category of the long-term unemployed is elderly people who have already reached pensionable age but do not have the required number of years of contributions to retire under Greek law and remain unemployed.

1. Are there favourable provisions applying to such cases under the laws of the member States?

If so, in which States?

2. Is it not fair to claim a pension from the contributions paid into the social security fund?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (13 March 1998)

With regard to the matter raised by the Honourable Member, the Commission wishes to point out that, as far as the organisation and operation of social protection schemes is concerned, the Member States are free to lay down their own rules, subject to compliance with the Community legislation relating to equal treatment for men and women: Article 119 of the EC Treaty, Directive 79/7/EEC ((OJ L 6, 10.1.1979. )) and Council Directive 96/97/EC of 20 December 1996 amending Directive 86/378/EEC on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women in occupational social security schemes ((OJ L 46, 17.2.1997. )); the rules governing social security for migrant workers (Council Regulations 1408/71 and 574/72 of 21 March 1972 laying down the procedure for implementing Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community ((OJ L 74, 27.3.1972. )), as amended) also apply.

The competent authorities of the Member States have sole responsibility for matters such as the payment of benefits to unemployed persons who have reached pensionable age or claims made on the basis of contributions paid into a pension fund.

The Commission does not have any information on favourable provisions applying in certain Member States as regards unemployed persons who have reached the statutory pensionable age.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0528/98 by Concepció Ferrer (PPE) to the Council (27 February 1998)

Subject: Poverty 4 programme

When the Poverty 3 programme ended on 30 June 1994, a new programme was drawn up which has yet to be adopted by the Council. Bearing in mind that the programme was intended to finance measures to improve housing conditions and the integration of the homeless, will the Council say when it intends to adopt this programme?

Answer (11 May 1998)

As the Honourable Member has just stated, the Commission submitted to the Council in 1994 a proposal for a Council Decision establishing a medium-term pilot programme to combat economic and social exclusion and promote solidarity. The programme was intended to cover the period 1994-1999. The unanimity on this proposal required by the legal basis (Article 235 of the TEC) could not be reached at Council level on 24 June 1994.

No further talks have been held by the Council since then on the proposal for a Decision on the programme to combat economic and social exclusion.

The Honourable Member is no doubt aware that the United Kingdom since brought an action before the Court of Justice (1 April 1996) against the Commission seeking the annulment of the decisions referred to in the Commission Press Release of 23 January 1996 on the grounds that the Commission could not incur expenditure within the framework of appropriations entered in the budget * under the heading of action to combat poverty * without lawful authority, if the Council has not adopted a decision to that effect. The case in question is Case C-106/96 ((OJ C 145, 18.5.1996, p. 7. )). The Court's judgment is pending.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0243/98 by Outi Ojala (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (13 February 1998)

Subject: Use of primates in animal experiments

Primates such as chimpanzees are similar to humans in many respects, and for this reason are widely used in scientific experiments. Primates are used, for example, in research relating to neurology, infectious diseases, toxicology and vaccination. The experiments cause these animals, with their highly developed nervous system and intelligence, a great deal of stress, and for this reason the experiments are extremely dubious from an ethical point of view. Moreover, the conditions in laboratories are often very unsatisfactory for primates: their living areas are too small and their opportunities for social contact and varied activity are limited.

In the EU over 10 000 primates are used every year for research purposes like those outlined above, and unlike other experimental animals, their numbers have not fallen but rather risen.

What is the Commission's view on the use of primates in animal experiments? Does the Commission propose to take measures to prohibit their use in such experiments under Directive 86/609/EEC ((OJ L 358, 18.12.1986, p. 1. ))?

Does the Commission intend to implement the programme outlined by EUPREN (European Primate Resources Network) for the production of animals for experimental purposes in the EU, even though it conflicts with worldwide endeavours to reduce the use of animals in experiments?

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

The Commission fully supports any efforts to reduce the number of non-human primates used as laboratory animals.

To that effect the Commission has taken the initiative to commence discussions with Member States, non governmental organizations (NGOs) and industry with regard to the use of non-human primates as laboratory animals. The purpose of the initiative is to tighten control in relation to the acquisition and use of non-human primates for test purposes in laboratories. At this stage, however, the Commission does not plan to ban the use of non-human primates for experimental purposes under Directive 86/609/EEC on the protection of animals used for experimental and other scientific purposes.

The European primate resources network (Eupren) have outlined their programme under their responsibility. It is not a matter for the Commission to implement this programme.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0116/98 by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission (30 January 1998)

Subject: Testing on animals for cosmetics products

When does the Commission plan to issue its proposals on the cosmetics Directive to ban testing on animals where viable non-animal tests exists or finished product testing?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (18 March 1998)

Under new Article 4(1)(i) of Council Directive 76/768/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to cosmetic products ((OJ L 262, 27.9.1976. )), introduced by Council Directive 93/35 ((OJ L 151, 23.6.1993. )) Member States must, as from 1 January 1998, prohibit the placing on the market of cosmetic products containing ingredients or combinations of ingredients tested on animals.

However, the Article specifies that 'if there has been insufficient progress in developing satisfactory methods to replace animal testing, and in particular in those cases where alternative methods of testing, despite all reasonable endeavours, have not been scientifically validated as offering an equivalent level of protection for the consumer, taking into account OECD toxicity test guidelines, the Commission shall, by 1 January 1997, submit draft measures to postpone the date of implementation of this provision, for a sufficient period, and in any case for no less than two years'.

The Commission adopted on 17 April 1997 Directive 97/18/EC postponing the date after which animal tests are prohibited for ingredients or combinations of ingredients of cosmetic products ((OJ L 114, 1.5.1997. )). This postpones until 30 June 2000 the date on which animal tests in respect of ingredients and combinations of ingredients will be prohibited.

In addition, the Commission is currently examining the possibility of amending the Cosmetics Directive. The aim is to reduce and, wherever possible, eliminate animal suffering. All the aspects of this question need to be carefully examined.

While protecting public health remains the Commission's chief concern, it nonetheless attaches the greatest importance to reducing animal suffering on ethical grounds. It will therefore pursue its efforts to expedite at all levels work on the development, validation and acceptance of alternative methods. The progress in 1997 in the field of alternative methods will be described in the Commission report currently under preparation, which will be submitted to the Parliament.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0105/98 by Marjo Matikainen-Kallström (PPE) to the Commission (30 January 1998)

Subject: Classification of tobacco smoke as a carcinogenic agent

In his answer to my question E-2247/97 ((OJ C 76, 11.3.1998, p. 82. )), Commissioner Flynn stated that the Commission does not at present propose to classify tobacco smoke as a carcinogenic agent. There is a great deal of undisputed scientific evidence about the link between tobacco smoke and cancer. However, the Commission does not intend to take account of this in its programme on protecting non-smokers from the effects of passive smoking.

In view of the above, I should like to put a follow-up question:

How does the Commission justify the fact that it does not intend to classify tobacco smoke as a carcinogenic agent even though the link between tobacco smoke and cancer is at the very heart of the debate on passive smoking?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (17 March 1998)

The Commission has no doubts in agreeing with the Honourable Member that there is convincing scientific evidence that there is a increased risk of cancer and other diseases for people systematically exposed to tobacco smoke. The Commission also agrees that this justifies measures to protect non-smokers from the health effects of breathing tobacco smoke of other people.

For the same reasons the Council adopted a Resolution on the matter of tobacco smoke in public places in 1989 ((OJ C 189, 26.7.1989. )) which was subject of a Commission report in 1996 ((COM(96) 573 final. )) setting out the measures taken by Member States to give it effect.

Furthermore within the framework of Community legislation concerned with the protection of workers, specific measures regarding smoking at the workplace are already in effect (for example work with asbestos, the dangers of smoking to pregnant women) and the Commission is examining how these rules could be reinforced especially to protect all workers at their place of employment from suffering the effects of passive smoking.

The use of the term 'classification' in the context of these activities is perhaps not the most appropriate. What is important is the recognition that tobacco smoke, or a component of the smoke, can cause cancer or other diseases and that measures should be taken which effectively deal with the issue.

This is why the Commission communication on smoking prevention ((COM(96) 609 final. )) sets out practical measures to limit the effects of passive smoking. These measures are considered to have the best potential for effective impact on the public so that people realise the dangers both in their daily life and at their place of work.