ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1871/96 by Michl Ebner (PPE) to the Commission (5 July 1996)

Subject: Compulsory vaccination in Italy

Vaccination against polio, diphtheria, tetanus and hepatitis B is compulsory is Italy and, where this requirement is not met, heavy fines are imposed (up to 1 500 000 lire per case and per parent), children are not permitted to attend school or to take state examinations, access to social institutions (crèches, children's homes, kindergartens, youth groups) is denied and admission to sports clubs is impossible. The Commission is invited to consider whether this is compatible with the right of free establishment, which is ensured in the EU, seeing that this right is invalidated in Italy by a state law making vaccination compulsory.

In South Tyrol there are currently four cases of children being excluded from school and one of a child denied access to a kindergarten because they do not have vaccination certificates. They are all children of immigrants from Germany and Austria, where vaccination is not compulsory.

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (2 August 1996)

The Commission is aware of the differences in legal provisions in the Member States concerning compulsory vaccination. These differences in requirements also exist as regards vaccinations which are merely recommended.

Responsibility for vaccination timetables and the legal obligations arising from these lies with the Member States, as long as these provisions apply to all residents without any discrimination against nationals of other Member States.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1118/96 by Angela Billingham (PSE) to the Commission (13 May 1996)

Subject: Danger of paracetamol intake

In the United Kingdom, there have been a number of cases of death caused by the intake of paracetamol tablets. The safe dosage can easily be inadvertently exceeded and a relatively small overdose can be fatal. Paracetamol can be purchased in large quantities, very cheaply from many retail outlets, including supermarkets. An antidote, methionine can be incorporated into paracetamol to make it safer and, although this may have minor side effects, it can help to prevent fatal consequences.

Is the Commission aware of the instances of death caused by paracetamol in other Member States of the Union. Is paracetamol as easily available in other Member States?

What action is the Commission prepared to take to make paracetamol safer? Is it prepared to take action which would require all paracetamol products to contain an antidote or could it introduce measures in order to permit the sale of paracetamol only as a prescription drug?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (21 June 1996)

Paracetamol is a well known analgesic and antipyretic which is harmless under normal circumstances. However, an overdose can cause liver damage and medical literature has cited serious adverse reactions following suicide attempts or massive overdoses (between 20 and 30 tablets).

For this reason, the Council of Europe has adopted a resolution recommending that a warning be included in the information provided with the medicinal product. This warning urges people not to exceed the prescribed or recommended doses and not to extend the treatment. Since marketing authorizations for medicinal products containing paracetamol are granted by the Member States, the respective governments are able to control the inclusion of such a warning.

Neither the Commission nor the European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products (EAMP) are aware of any recent deaths which can be attributed to the use of paracetamol. Paracetamol can be obtained without a prescription and, according to the Commission's information, national authorities do not intend to change its conditions of availability nor enforce the inclusion of an antidote. New Community provisions relating to pharmacovigilance ((Council Directive 93/39/EEC, OJ L 214, 24.8.1993. )) ensure that serious adverse reactions will, henceforth, be recorded by the EAMP on a Community level and that the pharmaceutical situation will be carefully monitored.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1202/96 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (15 May 1996)

Subject: Bosnian Muslim evacuees, temporarily resident in South Essex

Could the Commission outline the residence status accorded to Bosnian evacuees in the various Member States of which it is aware, given that UNHCR has deemed that temporary protection should now be lifted? What number and proportion of evacuees are being offered permanent residence status in each case? Has the Commission had discussions with the British Government - and will it do so - concerning the offer of permanent residence status to Bosnian Muslim evacuees who are currently resident in my constituency in South Essex and who wish to acquire such status?

Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission (24 June 1996)

With regard to the conditions for the lifting of temporary protection for displaced persons from Bosnia and Herzegovina, the United Nations High commissioner for refugees, Mrs Ogata, has renewed her previous assessment after an extensive field trip in the region. Based on the observations she made during that visit, Mrs Ogata stated at the Humanitarian issues working group of the peace implementation conference on 13 May 1996, that the situation regrettably still does not lend itself to the lifting of temporary protection.

The residence status offered to displaced persons from Bosnia Herzegovina varies considerably between Member States, according to decisions to grant temporary protection to the displaced, or other forms of protection for which they may be eligible. Depending on national legislation and individual cases, Bosnians may be offered different residence status, such as 'exceptional leave to remain', various forms of temporary protection, special residence permits on humanitarian grounds, permanent residence permits, or refugee status. Member States have not provided the Commission with specific figures concerning numbers and proportions of Bosnians being offered permanent residence status.

The decision to grant permanent residence status to third country nationals is a matter of competence of the Member States.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1446/96 by Christine Oddy (PSE) to the Commission (12 June 1996)

Subject: UN Fourth World Conference on Women - Beijing, September 1995

What steps has the Commission taken to implement the Beijing Agreement, which aims to create significant progress towards equality development and peace?

What measures does the Commission intend to take to monitor and coordinate the EU Governments' plans of action?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1446/96 and E-1453/96 given by Mr Marin on behalf of the Commission (10 July 1996)

The resolution of 20 December 1995 on integrating gender issues in development co-operation has been distributed widely, together with a summary of the main Beijing implications for development co-operation. A process of consultation and discussion is under way in the Commission on implementation of the resolution and follow-up to the Beijing platform.

The Commission has already introduced mandatory procedures to ensure attention to gender at each stage of the project cycle. These will be continued and reinforced for all mainstream development co-operation. Systematic attention will be given to integrating gender issues in policy and strategy documents. Focal points for gender issues have been established in a number of key services, in order to identify needs, constraints and the best ways for implementing the resolution. A number of training workshops on gender for Commission staff are taking place in June and July 1996. Others are planned to follow.

A number of pilot countries have been selected in each developing region for intensive attention to gender and development at policy, programming, and project level, with detailed backup from highly qualified consultants. It is planned to hold in autumn 1996 the first of the expert meetings on gender and development with Member States advocated by the resolution, to discuss development of common criteria and indicators for integration of gender in development. A number of large-scale positive action programmes to reduce gender inequalities are already included in development co-operation programming for 1996. Others are likely to be included as developing countries complete their follow-up plans of action for Beijing.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1478/96 by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE) to the Commission (12 June 1996)

Subject: Recognition of olive growers' organization in Crete

In 1993, 1182 olive growers at Chania in Crete set up a cooperative, 'Elaioparagogiki A.E.', for the production and marketing of olives and olive oil. The organization was originally set up by 707 olive growers, who had previously been members of other cooperatives, operating as groups of producers in accordance with Regulation 136/66/EEC ((OJ 172, 30.9.1966, p. 3025. )).

These producers notified their organizations of their intention to leave, either in person or through their legal representatives, so that they would be free to work for their new organization, 'Elaioparagogiki A.E.', from the following year. At the same time, a further 308 olive growers became members of 'Elaioparagogiki A.E.', having supplied all the documentation required under Regulations 136/66/EEC and 1360/78/EEC ((OJ L 166, 23.6.1978, p. 1. )). The organization currently has more than a thousand members producing thousands of tonnes of olive oil every year.

However, although 'Elaioparagogiki A.E.' fulfils all the conditions required by the above-mentioned Regulations, the Greek administration, specifically the prefecture of Chania by its decisions Nos. 771 and 772 of 27 January 1994 and Nos. 2612 and 2613 of 23 March 1994, refuses to recognize it as a producers' organization.

In the light of the above, will the Commission say how this problem might be resolved and whether it could assist in this respect?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (8 July 1996)

Recognition of producers' organizations under Regulations No 136/66/EEC and/or (EEC) No 1360/78 falls within the competence of the Member States and, consequently, is carried out by the national authorities on the basis of the specific criteria set by the regulations referred to above.

Recognition as a producer group pursuant to Regulation (EEC) No 1360/78, and in accordance with the conditions laid down in the implementing Regulation (EEC) No 220/91 ((OJ L 26, 31.1.1991. )), enables the group to qualify for start-up aid for the first five years of activity.

Recognition as an organization of producers under Regulation No 136/66/EEC leads to the granting of aid to the organization to control and administer producer subsidies granted by the Community to the members of the organization.

The refusal to recognize the organization in question by the Greek authorities, by means of the decisions quoted by the Honourable Member, was investigated by Commission in the past. On the basis of the information available at that time, the refusal was deemed to be warranted.

The Commission will approach the Greek authorities to see whether any new elements have emerged.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1272/96 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (24 May 1996)

Subject: Consumer protection

Directive 95/58/EC ((OJ L 299, 12.12.1995, p. 11.)) on consumer protection in the indication of the prices of products will give rise to major problems for small traders which cannot be ignored.

In order to overcome the difficulties with which small retail traders will be faced, will the Commission finance:

1. information programmes for small traders, and

2. the drawing up or publication of information booklets in conjunction with their intended recipients?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1272/96 and E-1273/96 given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (11 July 1996)

The Honourable Member takes over the concerns expressed in Parliament's amendments adopted on 18 April 1996 concerning the Commission proposal on consumer protection in the indication of the prices offered to consumers (amendment n° 19 for Written Question E-1272/96; amendment n° 15 for Written Question E-1273/96).

As invited by the Parliament, the Commission is preparing a modified proposal in which the Honourable Member will soon find the position of the Commission.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1791/96 by Gerhard Botz (PSE) to the Commission (3 July 1996)

Subject: Article 8 of EEC Regulation No 4256/88

Innovative measures for rural areas are increasingly important in the context of the debate on the future development of the CAP. Article 8 of EEC Regulation No 4256/88 ((OJ L 374 of 31 December 1988, p. 25.)) provides for the funding of pilot projects in this sector.

Would the Commission answer the following questions:

1. Since when has the Commission funded projects under Article 8 of EEC Regulation No 4256/88?

2. In connection with what kind of project are most applications for funding submitted?

3. How does the Commission publicise the results of such pilot projects throughout the Union?

4. How many applications for funding have been received to date (broken down by Member State)?

5. How many projects have been funded to date (broken down by Member State)?

6. What is the Commission's assessment of the probable future development of funding under Article 8?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (30 July 1996)

1. Implementation of Article 8 began in 1989.

2. Between 1989 and 1995, 52 general studies and projects on the evaluation of Community programmes were launched on the Commission's own initiative. (A Table on these has been sent direct to the Honourable Member and Parliament's Secretariat.) Some of these measures were executed in a particular Member State and included technical assistance measures mostly involving aid for implementing and monitoring Community regulations.

There were 78 pilot and demonstration projects in various agricultural and rural sectors. In agri-environment the measures involved the demonstration of more environmentally friendly techniques and the setting up of pilot farms. A large proportion of the projects relating to agricultural diversification and turning to account of the resulting products involved non-food products, but in some the aim was to promote traditional quality products. Developing activities linked with forests, farm-tourism and land-use planning were among the other main topics covered by pilot and demonstration projects financed between 1989 and 1995.

Most of the (eight) dissemination projects involved financing leaflets and organizing seminars aimed at disseminating information about the Community's rural development policy.

3. The work schedule for each project includes dissemination to potential users of the results obtained. Also under consideration is a specific measure to give more publicity to the results by summarizing the most representative projects.

4 - 5. Proposals submitted under Article 8 (1989-1995)

>TABLE>

Projects financed under Article 8 (1989-1995)

>TABLE>

Proposals submitted in 1995 under Article 8 following calls for proposals published in Official Journal No C 303 of 29 October 1994.

>TABLE>

This included projects selected with a possible view to financing from the 1996 budget.

>TABLE>

6. In the interests of ensuring that more and better information on measures to be financed is provided, the plans for the future are to use more calls for tender specifically for priority topics.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1618/96 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (24 June 1996)

Subject: Tied aid to Latin America

What proportion of EU aid to Latin America was tied to commercial contacts to support trade between that region and the Union last year, and how does this compare to the proportion and overall level five years ago?

What policy guidelines and agreements does the Commission follow in this respect?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission (18 July 1996)

By definition, Commission-managed development aid for Latin America is not tied to commercial contracts. As its name suggests, such aid is primarily designed to support the poorest people in society, in accordance with Regulation (EEC) No 443/92 on financial and technical assistance to, and economic cooperation with, the developing countries in Asia and Latin America. ((OJ L 52, 27.2.1992. ))

However, the Community also supports moves to boost trade and advocates joint efforts to improve the international competitiveness of Latin American countries. The Commission is currently implementing a series of measures to develop two-way trade and investment in a bid to diversify and modernize Latin American economies.

The Commission has also taken steps to help Latin American exports to the Community. These include concessions for industrial, tropical and farm products through the GSP and exemption from customs duties for some important agricultural produce under the CAP.

Trade relations between the Community and its partners are governed by WTO rules.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0847/96 by Iñigo Méndez de Vigo (PPE) to the Commission (12 April 1996)

Subject: Financing of the Cohesion Fund

In the course of the current year the Commission is to examine the final 1995 budgetary reports of the Member States which receive money from the Cohesion Fund in order to ascertain whether or not they have achieved the public deficit management objectives set by the Council for that year. If a given Member State has not fulfilled the objective set by the Council for 1995 the Commission will suspend payments from the Cohesion Fund for new projects or further stages of existing projects. Will the Commission's examination be carried out in strict accordance with the economic indicators or will account be taken of the fact that the Member States in question may have made progress even if they have not fulfilled all the criteria exactly?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (25 June 1996)

In September 1994 the Council decided in accordance with Article 104C, paragraph 6, EC Treaty that of the four Member States benefiting from the Cohesion fund Greece, Portugal and Spain had excessive government deficits. The Council fixed the annual objective for the 1995 deficit ratio to gross domestic product (GDP) for each Member State as follows:

>TABLE>

The Commission has examined the budgetary performance of these Member States for the year 1995 taking into account data transmitted by the Member States in March 1996 and reached the conclusions set out below. Greece

On 14 May 1996, in the framework of its spring economic forecasts, the Commission presented a government deficit of 9.2% of GDP for Greece in 1995. For 1995 it can therefore be concluded that the Greek government deficit was inside the target recommended for that year by the Council. Portugal

On 14 May 1996, in the framework of its spring economic forecasts, the Commission presented a government deficit of 5.4% of GDP for Portugal in 1995. For 1995 it can therefore be concluded that the Portuguese government deficit was inside the target recommended for that year by the Council. Spain

On 14 May 1996, in the framework of its spring economic forecasts, the Commission presented a government deficit of 5.8% of GDP for Spain in 1995. For 1995 it can therefore be concluded that the Spanish government deficit was inside the target recommended for that year by the Council.

Hence the Commission will continue to approve new projects or, in the case of large multistage projects, new phases of projects in Greece, Portugal and Spain, until a new assessment of the deficit performance of those Member States is carried out as scheduled in autumn 1996.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2288/96 by Gianfranco Dell'Alba (ARE) to the Commission (27 August 1996)

Subject: The Mont Blanc motorway and respect for legislation concerning environmental impact assessment

The company 'Autostrade del Monte Bianco' is about to start work on building the Morgex-Courmayeur section of the motorway without any environmental impact assessment having been carried out in accordance with Directive 85/337/EEC ((OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p.40. )).

An appeal was lodged with the Commission by the consumer organization CODACONS, which asked the Commission to bring proceedings against Italy for infringement of Article 177 of the Treaty, since it did not apply Directive 85/337/EEC for the Sarre-Morgex section either.

On the other side of the border there is not the same determination to favour road transport to the detriment of other modes of transport which are more environmentally acceptable.

Does the Commission intend to bring proceedings against the Italian State for infringement of Article 177 of the Treaty in connection with the Mont Blanc motorway?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (1 October 1996)

The Commission has no knowledge of the facts referred to by the Honourable Member. It has asked the Member State concerned for information and will inform the Honourable Member of its findings.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0858/96 by Alfred Lomas (PSE) to the Commission (12 April 1996)

Subject: Nuclear reactors

How many nuclear reactors using highly enriched uranium (HEU) are currently in operation in EU States and, for each such reactor, what is the location, quantity of HEU used, year of first operation, expected number of further years of operation and operating authority (e.g. company, university)?

What is the aggregate quantity of HEU in the programme, has any HEU at any of the reactors gone missing in the past and have all the reactors operated under safeguards for all of their lives?

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission (3 July 1996)

In the Community, 50 research reactors and critical assemblies are subject to the safeguards specified in Chapter 7 of the Euratom Treaty.

Among these facilities, 23 were originally designed to use uranium with an enrichment above 20% (highly enriched uranium-HEU). It should be noted however, that in the course of the US sponsored reduced enrichment for research and test reactors programme (RERTR), the objectives of which are widely supported by research reactor operators in the Community, many have already been or are in the process of being converted for the use of low enriched uranium.

The quantity of nuclear fuel contained in the cores of these facilities depends on their size and purpose, but is typically of the order of several kilogrammes of uranium.

All these facilities have been subject to safeguards under the Euratom Treaty since it became applicable to each of them and, as applicable, to International atomic energy agency (IAEA) safeguards. The Commission is satisfied that no HEU used in them has been diverted from its intended uses in the period they were under Euratom safeguards (Article 77(a) of the Euratom Treaty) and therefore that HEU has not gone missing from them during that period.

Details of the name, operator and location of these facilities are given in the table below:

>TABLE>