ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3891/97 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (11 December 1997)

Subject: Organizations responsible for the management of EAGGF Guarantee Section spending

Will the Commission provide detailed information about the organizations (payment, certification and coordination bodies) authorized in each Member State in accordance with Council Regulation (EC) 1287/95 ((OJ L 125, 8.6.1995, p.1. )) and Commission Regulation 1663/95 ((OJ L 158, 8.7.1995, p.6. )) to manage EAGGF Guarantee Section spending, and say in particular which product they have been authorized to manage, what is their legal basis and whether they have a technical service or have entrusted other bodies with the technical controls?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (21 January 1998)

The detailed information requested on the payment certification and coordination bodies set up under Article 4(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 729/70 of the Council of 21 April 1970 on the financing of the common agricultural policy ((OJ L 94, 28.4.1970. )) and Articles 1, 2 and 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 1663/95 of 7 July 1995 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 729/70 regarding the procedure for the clearance of the accounts of the European agriculture guidance and guarantee fund (EAGGF) -guarantee section, is forwarded direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat. The position shown has been confirmed by Member States as correct as at 1 May 1997. The data is planned to be revised and updated following the accounts clearance decision for the 1997 financial year in April 1998.

All paying agencies rely on technical services either in house or by delegation to other national authorities. As a general rule the physical controls pertinent to claims for export refunds are performed by the customs authorities. The delegation of technical services for other measures follows the national administrative structures adopted by each Member State. All technical services - in house or delegated - must comply with the relevant accreditation criterion which is set out at point 4 of the annex to Regulation (EEC) No 1663/95.

The Commission has already evaluated the performance of all major paying agencies against the accreditation criteria set out in the annex to Regulation (EEC) No 1663/95 and has obtained improvements where deficiencies have been noted. This process continues by means of direct visits on-the-spot and by means of the annual audit reports which are submitted by certifying bodies, and evaluated by the Commission, with any problems identified pursued as necessary.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3103/97 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission (13 October 1997)

Subject: Conflict between EPO case law and draft patent directive

Recital 17b (new) of the Rothley report (which the Commission intends to accept), on the proposal for a European Parliament and Council Directive on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions

(A4-0222/97), stipulates that a plant totality which is characterized by a particular gene is not excluded from patentability even if it comprises plant varieties. This is in flagrant breach of the case law of the European Patent Organization, such as decision T 356/93 (EPO Official Journal for 1995, p. 545).

How is this conflict, and the associated legal uncertainty, to be resolved?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (6 January 1998)

In reply to the question put by the Honourable Member, the Commission would point out that it is aware of the fact that the wording of recital 17b (new), which takes over Amendment No 20 adopted by Parliament, is at variance with Decision T 356/93 of 21 February 1995 of the Technical Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office (EPO). The same is true of Article 4(2) of the amended proposal, which takes over Parliament's Amendment No 47. Parliament took the view that the interpretation of the exclusion from patentability of plant varieties given by the Technical Board of Appeal was not to be followed as regards application of Member State legislation on invention patents that also provides for exclusion from patentability. The Commission shares this view.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3953/97 by Marjo Matikainen-Kallström (PPE) to the Commission (12 December 1997)

Subject: Applications for support under regional and research programmes

In my question of 17 September 1997 to the Commission (E-2961/97) ((OJ C 134, 30.4.1998, p. 44. )) I called for a reduction in bureaucracy in the EU's research policy and regional policy. Having received the Commission's reply, I should like to ask a further question.

What are the most common reasons for projects being rejected?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (27 January 1998)

The principal criteria against which project proposals are evaluated in the research and technological development (RDT) programmes of the Community are scientific and technical excellence, innovativeness, transnational collaboration (European added value), cost effectiveness, the competence of the proposers and perspectives for disseminating and exploiting results. In addition, each specific programme sets out in its work programme the criteria essential for achieving its particular objectives. Because of limitations on available funding and significant competition for such funds, failure to meet the required standard for any of these criteria (which are all made public) will generally result in a proposal being rejected. The commonest reasons for failure of proposals in most programmes are insufficient scientific and technical quality innovativeness.

Information on the most common reasons for rejecting RDT projects within structural funds programmes would need to be ascertained from the Member States themselves since they apply their own specific procedures to the selection of projects in the context of monitoring committees. Project selection criteria will similarly vary in the light of the particular priorities of the programme concerned.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-3945/97 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission (4 December 1997)

Subject: State aids to undertakings in deprived urban areas

In October 1996 the Commission adopted a new reference framework for state aids to undertakings in deprived urban areas. Under the previous system, the Member States had been unable to take full account of the wide range of social and economic problems obtaining in the outlying areas of Europe's major cities. The ceiling for such aid was set at 26% net of investment and ECU 10 000 for each new job created. The Commission's intention was to help boost employment in outlying areas, where unemployment rates are generally high.

Despite the fact that the Commission called on the Member States to take advantage of this new legislative framework, which is valid for five years and provides for specific aid programmes, the Italian Government has as yet - more than a year since the framework's adoption - failed to adopt all the measures required to initiate such programmes.

Given the above, would the Commission state:

1. its views on the Italian Government's tardiness in applying the new European rules, given in particular that they are valid for only five years from 1996?

2. which Member States have, pursuant to the Commission communication, already initiated aid programmes for outlying areas of major cities?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission (13 January 1998)

As the Commission indicated to the Honourable Member in its answer to Written Question No P-2628/97 ((OJ C 82, 17.3.1998, p. 117. )), the guidelines on state aid for undertakings in deprived urban areas ((OJ C 146, 14.5.1997. )), adopted by it on 2 October 1996, lay down rules for identifying urban districts which can be classed as deprived urban areas eligible for state aid subject to certain conditions and ceilings which, if met, allow the aid to be considered compatible with the common market. Those rules are intended as clarification for Member States, not as an invitation to grant aid. It is the Member States which are responsible for taking decisions to grant aid and, if they do so, they are required to inform the Commission of any such plans they may have and to obtain its approval.

It is the Commission's understanding that only France has so far proceeded to grant this aid.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-4016/97 by Gerhard Hager (NI) to the Commission (11 December 1997)

Subject: Award of subsidies for natural gas pipe laying

As a means of ensuring natural gas supplies, a number of local authorities in Austria are awarding unconditional subsidies not subject to any repayment conditions to Energie-Versorgung Niederösterreich AG (EVN). The subsidies are payable partly by the kilometrage of pipeline laid, partly as a lump-sum (e.g. ATS 9 535 000 paid by Haag municipal authority for 16.9km of gas pipe laying), and, under the contracts currently concluded, are conditional neither on supplies at reduced prices to the local authority itself or to householders. It is also left to EVN's discretion to determine whether, and in what local-authority districts, it will provide a natural gas supply facility in future.

The local authorities also undertake, again for no financial return, to issue authorizations for laying pipelines and constructing related facilities on all sites for which they are now or subsequently will be responsible, and to make the sites required for the necessary engineering works available at Charge. Lastly, the local authorities undertake for the duration of the agreement neither to produce or distribute gas themselves, nor to authorize others to construct a gas-pipeline network or other facilities necessary for gas production or distribution on sites located on their property.

1. What is the Commission's view of the legal status of agreements concluded on the above terms?

2. Does the Commission intend to take any action against the award of the above subsidies - in particular vis-à-vis other energy sources - on the basis of competition law?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission (13 January 1998)

On the basis of the available information, the Commission is not yet in a position to decide whether subsidies from some Austrian municipalities to the energy company Energie-Versorgung Niederösterreich (EVN) are compatible with the competition rules laid down in Article 92 and 93 of the EC Treaty.

The Commission will immediately ask the Austrian authorities for a detailed information and investigate the agreements entered into.

If the Commission has doubts on the compatibility of the agreements with the Community law, it will immediately initiate the procedure provided for in Article 93(2) of the EC Treaty.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3884/97 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) and Spalato Belleré (NI) to the Commission (5 December 1997)

Subject: Motor vehicles intended for the transport of dangerous goods

The Commission has submitted a proposal for a European Parliament and Council Directive relating to motor vehicles and their trailers with regard to the transport of dangerous goods by road and amending Directive 70/156/EEC in respect of the type-approval of motor vehicles and their trailers (COM(96) 555 final - 96/0267 COD) ((OJ C 29, 30.1.1997, p. 17. )).

There is no doubt as to the value of the Commission's proposal to regulate the approximation of laws on the type-approval of motor vehicles and their trailers, by amending Directive 70/156/EEC ((OJ L 42, 23.2.1970, p. 1. )) and introducing a new specific directive on the type-approval of motor vehicles and their trailers with regard to the manufacture of vehicles intended for the transport of dangerous goods by road.

Bearing in mind that in the meantime the Council has already adopted more than 36 specific directives on the type-approval of vehicles in category N, will the Commission also include the question of type-approval for vehicles intended for the transport of dangerous goods?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (21 January 1998)

The Commission confirms that the objective of the proposed directive is to establish the technical requirements for motor vehicles and their trailers intended for the transport of dangerous goods by road.

Compliance with all the relevant technical requirements of this directive will ensure free circulation for commercial vehicles (category N) and their trailers (category O) within the internal market of the Community.

Furthermore, when a vehicle type obtains an approval in accordance with this directive, Member States could not refuse it to be sold, registered or entered into service for reasons relating to its construction.

The above directive will be one of the separate directives linked to the framework by Directive 92/53/EEC of 18 June 1992 amending directive 70/156/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the type-approval of motor vehicles and their trailers ((OJ L 225, 10.8.1992. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3750/97 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission (21 November 1997)

Subject: Execution of services connected with the activities of Alitalia Spa

With regard to the joint answer to questions E-1858/97 and E-1859/97 ((OJ C 60, 25.2.1998, p. 59.)) it should be specified that the transport services referred to are expressly provided for staff and crews of Alitalia Spa. Consequently, whichever company concluded the contracts in question, whether the Società Aeroporti di Rome Spa or Alitalia Team Spa, it is necessary, for the purposes of the transparency of these agreements, to clarify the relationship between Alitalia Spa and the above-mentioned companies. Furthermore, despite the provisions of Article 1(b) of Directive 92/50/EEC ((OJ L 209, 24.7.1992, p. 1.)) and recital 18 of Directive 93/38/EEC ((OJ L 199, 9.8.1993, p. 84.)), Alitalia is a company 90% of whose capital is held by IRI, a public holding company. Nevertheless, the company can conclude contracts for tens of billions of Lire without being subject to any rules governing transparency, unlike other public companies, such as Ferrovio delle Stato Spa (the State Railways). This is an obvious anomaly, for which it is hard to find any justification.

In view of the above, can the Commission say:

1. whether both the contracts referred to in the above-mentioned written questions are to be considered as having been concluded by Alitalia Spa;

2. the reason for the anomalous situation whereby Alitalia Spa, 90% of whose capital is held by the public holding company IRI, should be excluded from the application of any European law on public contracts, thereby jeopardizing the correctness and transparency of the contracts concluded by it?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (6 January 1998)

1. In her previous written questions (E-1858/97 and E-1859/97), the Honourable Member stated that the contracts for the transport of passengers and crew had been awarded by Alitalia S.p.A. through its administrative office at Fiumicino airport and through Alitalia Team S.p.A. respectively.

2. The Honourable Member is asked to refer to the answer given to those written questions as regards the scope of Directives 92/50/EEC coordinating award procedures for public service contracts and 93/38/EEC coordinating contract award procedures in the water, energy, transport and telecommunications sectors.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2921/97 by Bertel Haarder (ELDR) to the Commission (17 September 1997)

Subject: Development aid to third world countries

A number of Member States have found it practically impossible to return persons whose applications for asylum have been rejected (and are not refugees) to their home countries, as their governments refuse to accept their own citizens. Some of these countries' governments are also receiving considerable amounts of development aid from the EU.

Will the Commission seriously consider stopping all development aid to third world governments which do not accept back their own citizens who are refused asylum in an EU country?

Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission (11 November 1997)

As far as development aid is concerned, the Commission is implementing the Council Resolution of 5 June 1997 on coherence. It is proceeding by convening meetings of experts from Member States, where all the global questions relating to the link between migration and development are currently under consideration.

On the specific point of readmission, the Commission is aware of the problems created by third countries which refuse or delay the readmission of their citizens illegally present on the territory of the Member States. The Commission believes that these problems can be raised in the framework of bilateral relations between the Community and the third countries concerned. The Council can decide, case by case, that specific reference to the problems of readmission is to be included in the Community or mixed agreements with third countries. Therefore, on the basis of the mandate received by the Council, the Commission negotiates the insertion of these references in the agreements.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3897/97 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Council. Acts of brutality committed in Somalia by soldiers from EU Member States



Official Journal C 174 , 08/06/1998 P. 0153



WRITTEN QUESTION E-3897/97 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Council (10 December 1997) Subject: Acts of brutality committed in Somalia by soldiers from EU Member States With reference to Written Question E-2488/97 by the Honorable Member Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE), in which he asks 'Will the Council say how it intends to react to the reports of unprecedented acts of brutality by soldiers from Member States (and notably, founding members) of the Union, acts which have dealt a devastating blow to its prestige as a whole and which give its declarations about ''protection of human rights' a hollow ring?', will the Council give an immediate response in the light of the findings of an inquiry by the Italian Ministry of Defence and the admission by the editor of 'Panorama' that he was mistaken, in order to prevent any offence to the peace forces sent to Somalia, particularly the illustrious soldiers of Folgore? Answer (26 February 1998) The Honourable Member's Question does not fall within the Council's purview.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3605/97 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission (13 November 1997)

Subject: Social dialogue and measures taken against workers

There has been much talk recently at European level about the usefulness of the social dialogue, especially since the incorporation of the Social Protocol in the new EU Treaty.

Despite all this, workers continue to face insurmountable problems which are getting worse, without any hope of a solution in the foreseeable future.

Will the Commission give its views on the results so far of the social dialogue in the Member States and say whether it expects this to bring about any improvement in the employment situation of workers, given that antipopular measures are building up against them, their incomes which are already low are being depressed still further and well over 20 million persons are out of work in the EU?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (19 January 1998)

The dialogue between the social partners greatly contributes to shaping the economic and social environment and has become one of the cornerstones of our model of society. The crucial importance of informing and consulting the social partners and involving them in dialogue and negotiations is generally recognised in all Member States.

The social dialogue has made good progress at European level. The Agreement on Social Policy annexed to the Treaty on European Union has been the source of interesting contractual developments. The social partners have concluded two agreements, one on parental leave in 1996 and one on part-time work in June 1997.

Combating unemployment has been a top priority at Community level in recent years. For the first time, an extraordinary meeting of the European Council * held on 21 November 1997 in Luxembourg * was devoted exclusively to employment.

The European Council invited the social partners to play their part in implementing an integrated and coordinated employment strategy, bearing in mind their specific responsibilities and powers. Besides, the Luxembourg guidelines recommend close involvement of the social partners at all stages of the process.

Recent developments in the employment field have nurtured the social dialogue at national level. Thus, tripartite consultations between the public authorities and the social partners have led to national employment pacts in several Member States. In addition, trade unions and employers' organisations at different levels are pursuing their collective negotiations on ways of promoting employment and on the adaptation of the rules governing the labour market in all the Member States.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3969/97 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (12 December 1997)

Subject: Unemployment among young people with further vocational training

Research findings published in Eurostat (No 6897/6-1097) show that the unemployment rate in Greece for young people with further vocational training is higher (20%) than that for those who have only received basic training, (14.3%) whereas the average rates for the European Union are 11.5% and 23.5% respectively.

As these figures show the futility of further vocational training in Greece, will the Commission assess the causes of this 'paradoxical' phenomenon?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (2 February 1998)

The Commission is aware of the fact that the correlation between unemployment rate and level of training is not the same throughout the Community. Greece and Portugal are two Member States where a higher level of training does not reduce the risk of unemployment as appreciably as it does in the others. In both those Member States this situation does not appear to be peculiar to young people, but also applies to young adults of working age (25-49 years), especially men. This is illustrated in, for example, the report on 'Employment in Europe - 1996', which is being sent directly to the Honourable Member and to the Secretariat of the European Parliament.

Nevertheless, the relative worsening of the employment situation of persons with higher-level qualifications is a phenomenon which is observed in many Member States and can be explained by several factors. The sharp rise in participation in education and training and the increasing length of studies in all Member States over the past decade are liable to make it more difficult to absorb new generations with a higher level of training into the labour market, if the market's demand for skills and qualifications does not develop accordingly. The job structure trends associated with the progressive transformation of the European economy into a services and highly-skilled activities economy do give reason to believe that these difficulties are temporary, particularly in the case of young persons with further vocational training qualifications, but this transformation is not taking place at the same rate throughout the Community, and it is possible that Greece and other southern European Member States still have a relatively large proportion of more traditional activities and jobs.

The relatively high employment rate for young persons with further training may also reflect the fact that their training is not really consistent with employers' expectations and job requirements. Here too, everything suggests that this problem is not confined to Greece, although it is possible that this country has a greater deficit than other Member States in higher vocational training compared with university training in the more traditional subjects.

In any event, this is an important question that must be taken into account in all of the analyses which the Commission will carry out in monitoring implementation of the employment guidelines.