ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2958/98

by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Nuclear reactor at Akkuyu, Turkey

Despite growing international concern, Turkey is pressing ahead with plans to build a nuclear plant on the Aegean coast, even though it is absolutely clear that the region is prone to earthquake. Recently, a letter by the Canadian seismologist Buckthought was published in the Ottawa Citizen, rebutting all the Turkish claims that the region is not an earthquake zone. Among other things, the Canadian professor claims that since 1973 a number of seismic tremors have been recorded in Turkey, the epicentres of which have been between 4 and 60 kilometres from Akkuyu, the planned site of the reactor. In particular, he urges all those who have been involved in this extremely risky programme to adopt a responsible position since a Chernobyl type accident will have fatal consequences for millions of inhabitants of Turkey and the neighbouring countries of Cyprus, Greece and Israel.

Moreover, Turkey's insistence on buying the Canadian CANDU type of reactor, which uses totally different technology from normal high-pressure reactors, raises numerous questions. CANDUs can, in fact, be used to produce nuclear weapons, which is an obvious threat to peace in the wider region. Following India's admission that it succeeded in making its own nuclear bomb with the aid of a CANDU reactor, it cannot be ruled out that Turkey might also repeat the process.

In the light of these revelations, what action will the Commission take to persuade Turkey (an EU associate country) to cancel this nuclear programme which poses such a tremendous threat to the safety of the EU's population?

Answer given by Mr van den Broek on behalf of the Commission

(28 October 1998)

The Commission would refer the Honorable Member to its answer to his Written Questions P-662/98(1), E-1876/98(2) and E-2190/98(3) and to Written Question E-2107/98 by Mr Alavanos(4).

(1) OJ C 304, 2.10.1998, p. 143.

(2) See page 12.

(3) See page 54.

(4) See page 37.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3023/98

by Sérgio Ribeiro (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Harmful environmental effects stemming from Community financial support (Cerâmica do Olival at Olival/Ourém and Preceram at Travasso/Pombal, Portugal)

In two towns within the same region, although not very close to one another (Olival/Ourém and Travasso/Pombal), there used to be, some years ago, two ceramics factories which were regarded by the local people as part of their living and working environment.

Access to Community funds enabled the two factories - Cerâmica do Olival and Preceram - to implement modernisation programmes. However, what could (and, indeed, began to) be regarded as something beneficial (including by the local people) had an extremely harmful effect on the environment, apparently because of a new type of fuel being used. Plant life and agricultural produce were damaged over several successive years and many people felt that their health was suffering.

The response to this state of affairs took many different forms: local people demonstrated and protested to official bodies and even to the author of this question, who was able to experience the situation for himself in the towns concerned.

Those people are now feeling a degree of despair at the futility of their efforts and at the fact that the situation (particularly as regards public health) has not been remedied and is even getting worse. What was once regarded as a benefit (the Community funding provided) is now being blamed for the problems which have arisen.

Is the Commission aware of this issue? Did it express any opinion regarding the projects and has it (or had it) any control over the use of the funds, with particular regard to the environmental implications thereof?

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

(4 November 1998)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
91998E2115

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2115/98 by Glenys KINNOCK to the Commission. EU wine subsidies and agricultural reform



Official Journal C 096 , 08/04/1999 P. 0039
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2500/98

by Joaquín Sisó Cruellas (PPE) to the Commission

(30 July 1998)

Subject: Anorexia and bulimia

The Association against Anorexia and Bulimia (ACAB) recently presented itself to the public in Spain and called on advertisers to refrain from using impossible stereotypes in their advertising and to use other models, so that young people would no longer seek to imitate the stereotypes. The Association also appealed for an increase in resources for treating this illness. According to the figures provided, the number of consultations linked to anorexia and bulimia is increasing by 20 % each year in Spain, the majority of victims of this disorder being girls.

Given that the impact of these illnesses is growing constantly and is particularly affecting our young people, has any initiative been taken in the European Union with a view to tackling these disorders?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(20 October 1998)

The Commission shares the Honourable Member's concern about the increasing number of those, especially girls, suffering from anorexia or bulimia in Spain and in the Community in general.

The Community action programme on health promotion, information, education and training(1) covers this important public health issue, and the 1998 work programme provides for "attention to be given to the issue of bodyweight as a broad concept affecting the well-being of people, as well as eating disorders and other problems related to body image".

The Commission is at present funding two projects related to the prevention of eating disorders. One investigates the frequency and distribution of sub-clinical eating disorders in six European countries in order to develop preventive measures for these disorders. The second aims to improve the knowledge of this disease, to set up a database on specialised centres and an internet site, and to organise a conference at European level to disseminate the results.

(1) Decision 645/98/EC - OJ L 95, 16.4.1996.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2374/98

by Sebastiano Musumeci (NI) to the Commission

(17 July 1998)

Subject: Emergency created by illegal immigration in southern Italy and the Italian Government's failure to take action

Sadly, over the last few weeks, the problem of illegal immigrants being disembarked along the coast of southern Italy has reached alarming proportions; in Sicily alone, in just one week, the authorities intercepted hundreds of African nationals who had been enlisted by organizations involved in transporting illegal migrants across the Mediterranean. Meanwhile, due to the reprehensible failure of the official Italian authorities to take any practical advance measures to counter illegal immigration, the influx of immigrants can no longer be contained and the majority of them, having eluded any form of control by the police or health authorities, succeed in travelling on to other Member States, where they are destined for a life of poverty and exploitation by criminal organizations among others. Thus the Italian Government, by its permissive policy, has failed to comply with the specific undertakings it made in ratifying the Schengen Agreement, thereby prejudicing public order and security in Italy and the rest of the Union.

In view of the foregoing, does the Commission intend to take immediate action to urge the Italian Government to honour the undertakings made by it, and, if Italy continues to fail to fulfil its obligations, to bring an action before the European Court of Justice?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(22 September 1998)

No. The Schengen arrangements have not yet been incorporated into the framework of the Union and, in principle, it is not for the Commission to take a position on matters relating to Schengen.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2544/98

by Kirsten Jensen (PSE) to the Commission

(1 September 1998)

Subject: Allergies and intolerance

What initiatives will the Commission take in regard to intolerance of inhaling odours, chemicals and fumes (MCS)?

Have funds been earmarked for research into the origin of this form of intolerance?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(29 October 1998)

Heightened responses to chemicals at levels far lower than those at which most people respond are often referred to as, or associated with, chemical intolerance or multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS). In the absence of compelling scientific evidence on the relation between exposure to specific agents and health effects, surveys as to the existence and nature of conditions commonly named MCS have concluded that the lack of definitions and diagnosis presents the most important obstacle in collecting valid data on MCS. The Commission supported such work in 1994. In this context, the Honourable Member is also referred to the Commission's answer to Written Question E-2904/97 by Mrs Breyer(1). More generally, a rising prevalence of allergies and manifestations of allergic diseases can be observed throughout the Community. This has prompted the Commission to propose a public health action programme on pollution-related diseases by which it intends to tackle this problem, together with diseases linked to environmental pollution(2). Work on definitions and diagnosis on conditions such as MCS might be initiated under such a programme.

People working professionally with chemicals are covered by the Community legislation on health and safety at work, such as Council Directive 80/1107/EEC(3), 89/391/EEC(4), 90/394/EEC(5) and 98/24/EC(6). Such directives lay down minimum requirements under Article 118A which are to be applied in the workplace.

Within the programme on biomedicine and health research (Biomed 2, 1994-1998), namely under the area occupational and environmental health, research on allergies of public and occupational health importance is currently supported. This aims to improve the scientific knowledge needed to increase the safety and health protection of workers with an emphasis on the prevention of occupational diseases. Within the programme on environment and climate (1994-1998), research on identification of early indicators of health impairment from exposure to environmental pollutants is currently supported, including projects on indicators of metal sensitisation and health effects of air pollution.

In the Commission proposals for the fifth framework programme, research into diseases and allergies related to or influenced by the environment, and research into their treatment and prevention has been included in the key action 1 "health, food and environmental factors" within the thematic programme "quality of life and management of living resources".

(1) OJ C 134, 30.4.1998.

(2) OJ C 214, 16.7.1997.

(3) OJ L 327, 3.12.1980.

(4) OJ L 138, 29.6.1989.

(5) OJ L 196, 26.7.1990.

(6) OJ L 131, 5.5.1998.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1956/98

by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission

(30 June 1998)

Subject: Human rights abuses in Senegal

Senegal is a signatory to the Lomé Convention and as such is bound by Article 5.

In the light of this could the Commission state what action is being taken in response to human rights abuses in Senegal, reported by Amnesty International?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission

(24 July 1998)

On 17 September 1997 the presidency made a statement on behalf of the European Union on the situation in Casamance. On 31 December 1997 it sent a letter to Senegal's Minister of Foreign Affairs calling for a ceasefire, respect for human rights and a negotiated solution for the region based on Senegal's territorial integrity. A copy of this letter was given to the Senegalese authorities on 19 March by the Troika of ambassadors on the spot and the head of the Commission delegation.

EU resources for displaced persons and refugees have been available since 1996 and include ECU 750 000 under Article 255 of the Lomé IV Convention and ECU 300 000 for humanitarian aid (after the ECU 1 million approved in 1993). The Commission is currently considering the provision of further humanitarian aid.

Amnesty International's report "Climate of terror in Casamance", published in January and heavily criticised by the authorities, condemned serious human rights violations. The Troika's demarche on 19 March encouraged the Senegalese authorities to conduct independent investigations of the facts alleged by Amnesty. On 9 April the Senegalese Government published a report entitled "The truth about Casamance", which claims to refute Amnesty's report but is considered unsatisfactory by the international community.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2660/98

by Riccardo Garosci (PPE) and Luigi Florio (PPE) to the Council

(1 September 1998)

Subject: The Lehrer murder - the absence of extradition between Sri Lanka and Italy prevents justice from being done

An Italian citizen, Erika Lehrer Grego, was killed in Italy on 21 March last by a Sinhalese (Sri Lankan) citizen. The murderer, Pereira Nishantha Sudath, immediately left Italy and returned to his country of origin after having, however, confessed to the murder.

In the absence of bilateral extradition agreements with Sri Lanka, the Italian judicial authorities cannot request the extradition of the murderer, who is now happily living and working in Sri Lanka. This absence of diplomatic instruments creates a serious injustice and highlights once again the need for the interests of Community citizens to have joint diplomatic representation (as Parliament pointed out in its report A4-0193/97).

Can the Council say what stage has been reached in the plan for joint diplomatic representation of the Member States of the Union and what chance there is of ensuring that bilateral agreements between one Member State and a third country are applicable to another Member State which does not have the same arrangements?

Since the Member States of the European Union must guarantee the rights of more than 250 000 Sinhalese living in the Community (more than 30 000 in Italy alone), Sri Lanka must accept the elementary rules governing the coexistence of its citizens with those of Europe and ensure respect for justice in the countries where they live and work.

Can the Council say what pressure it intends to exert to ensure that serious offences such as this murder are dealt with by the justice system?

Reply

(19 October 1998)

Questions concerning bilateral extradition between a Member State and a third country are not within the Council's remit.

Extradition agreements can apply only between the States party to such agreements. It is for the Italian authorities, even in the absence of a bilateral agreement, to examine the various legal instruments which might enable an extradition request to be successful.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2190/98

by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission

(10 July 1998)

Subject: Earthquake at Adana in Turkey

The tragedy of the disastrous earthquake at Adana in Turkey on 27 June 1998 has, unfortunately, borne out my misgivings concerning Turkey's plans to set up a nuclear plant at Akkuyu, which is only 70 kilometres approximately from Adana. I had voiced my concern about the seismicity of the region in my question No E-1078/97(1) to the Commission, without receiving a specific answer to the issues involved.

Having put another question, No E-3787/97(2), to the Commission, I received the assurance that "information obtained by the Commission from other sources shows that the Akkuyu site was selected by the Turkish authorities following extensive studies, focusing on seismic, geological and environmental aspects in particular, by specialised departments of several Turkish universities."

Following the tragic events, which claimed hundreds of lives, European public opinion is, justifiably, profoundly concerned at the Turkish Government's nonchalant attitude in persisting with the construction of a nuclear reactor in an extremely earthquake-prone area, which is in fact much closer to another fault-line than the one activated, known to seismologists as "South".

Does the Commission intend to intervene forcefully and in what manner, following recent events, to avert the possibility of a nuclear accident, which is inherent in the planned construction of a nuclear plant at Akkuyu, in an area which has proved to be highly susceptible to earthquake?

Answer given by Mr van den Broek on behalf of the Commission

(11 September 1998)

The Honourable Member is asked to refer to the Commission's answer to his Written Question, No E-1876/98(3).

The Commission has no competence to participate in site selection processes. Turkey's authorities, and in particular its nuclear regulatory body - the Turkish atomic energy authority (TAEA) - are responsible for such selection, within the general framework of the guidance from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

In the wake of the recent earthquake in the Adana region, the Turkish authorities have confirmed that all the necessary safety measures have been put in place for the Akkuyu power station. No building work has yet begun. The name of the consortium chosen to carry out construction should be published in August.

The head of the Germano-French consortium (Framatome and Siemens) bidding for the contract has said that the power station will be built using tried and tested technologies which will ensure its safety.

(1) OJ C 367, 4.12.1997, p. 74.

(2) OJ C 223, 17.7.1998, p. 22.

(3) See page 12.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1841/98

by James Moorhouse (ELDR) to the Commission

(12 June 1998)

Subject: Lebanese prisoners in Syria

What forms of pressure was the Commission able to exert during the negotiations on the Euro-Mediterranean Association Agreement with Syria in order to encourage the Syrian Government to release the 250 Lebanese prisoners still being held in its jails?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission

(9 July 1998)

Human rights questions such as that raised by the Honourable Member are addressed with the Syrian authorities under Common Foreign and Security Policy, in which the Commission is fully associated.

The Commission, which is currently negotiating a Euro-Mediterranean association agreement with the Syrian Government, does not currently have such legal instruments as provided for by the Euro-Mediterranean association agreements authorising it to intervene in human rights issues.

Economic and trade relations between the Community and Syria are governed by the cooperation agreement concluded between the two parties in 1978, which will be replaced by the Euro-Mediterranean association agreement once it has been concluded and ratified.

The Commission has included in the negotiations of the agreement several specific provisions, notably in the preamble which will refer to the parties' commitment to respect for human rights, democratic principles and economic freedom as a basis for the bilateral agreement. In addition, and as in the case of the agreements concluded with Tunisia, Morocco and Jordan, Article 2 of the Agreement will contain a clause stating that "respect for the democratic principles and fundamental human rights established by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights inspires the domestic and external policies of the Community and Syria and constitutes an essential element of this agreement".
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2445/98

by Angela Sierra González (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(30 July 1998)

Subject: Activities of the Chiquita multinational in Latin America

Recent reports appearing in various sectors of the media contain a number of interesting revelations on the activities of the Chiquita multinational in various Latin American countries.

These include the following:

- Chiquita secretly controls dozens of allegedly independent companies in order to evade restrictions on land ownership and laws on national security in Central American countries;

- Chiquita and its subsidiary firms have carried out operations using pesticides which have affected the health of their workers and people living in the area despite an agreement signed with an environmental group (Rainforest Alliance) to adhere to safety standards. The pesticides used include some which are not permitted in any EU country;

- hundreds of people in one district in Costa Rica have been exposed to emissions of toxic gas from a factory belonging to a subsidiary of Chiquita.

Is the Commission aware of the information reported in the media?

Does the Commission know whether the Chiquita multinational or its subsidiary firms comply with the parameters established to protect the health of their workers and conserve the environment?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission

(22 September 1998)

The Commission is keeping a watching brief on Chiquita in a number of Latin American countries.

It is aware that various Costa Rican bodies have brought actions in the local civil court and various United States courts against the use of highly toxic pesticides. The plaintiffs were successful in the US courts and damages were paid, but numerous complaints are still being lodged.

Reports in the media suggest that Chiquita is complying with its basic economic undertakings and pays the minimum wage for banana workers laid down by Costa Rican law. The monitoring of Chiquita's activities from the standpoint of environmental conservation is purely a matter for the Costa Rican authorities.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2782/98

by Johanna Maij-Weggen (PPE) to the Commission

(14 September 1998)

Subject: Implementation of the European Parliament's resolution on freedom of religion and human rights in Pakistan

Can the Commission state what action has been taken to implement the resolution on the blasphemy laws in Pakistan (resolution B4-0614/98 of 18 June 1998)?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission

(20 October 1998)

The Honourable Member will be aware that the Community-Pakistan cooperation agreement mentioned in the Parliament Resolution B4-0614 of 18 June 1998 has not yet been concluded.

Nevertheless, the Commission, with the agreement of the Pakistan government, will send an expert mission to Pakistan in late 1998 to assess elements of the human rights situation in the country with a view to proposing a programme of projects in the areas of democratisation, civil society and the promotion of human rights issues.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2000/98

by Irini Lambraki (PSE) to the Commission

(16 June 1998)

Subject: Amsterdam Treaty information campaign

The Amsterdam Treaty is at the stage of being ratified by the Member States. Does the Commission intend to conduct an information campaign on the significance of the Treaty and, if so, what amounts does it plan to make available to each Member State and what mechanisms will it use to administer those funds in each Member State?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(31 July 1998)

As part of the Priority Information Programme for European Citizens (Prince), the Commission is continuing the "Building Europe together" campaign in 1998. The aim is to make it easier to explain the Amsterdam Treaty to European citizens. This campaign was allocated appropriations totalling ECU 12 million for 1998. A call for proposals was published in the Official Journal(1), and Member States who so wish were given the opportunity to enter into agreements to cofinance communication schemes with the Commission to explain the Amsterdam Treaty to European citizens.

(1) OJ C 164, 29.5.1998.