ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0858/99

by Pieter Dankert (PSE) to the Commission

(7 April 1999)

Subject: ESF - The Netherlands

Dijkhuis Advies, which is a beneficiary of ESF Objective 3 training projects, reports that neither the final account for 1997 nor the second advance for 1998 have been paid and that the ESF coordinator has not given any reasons for these delays. Dijkhuis Advies also notes a recent tax measure known as the Supplementary Training Allowance from which projects co-financed by the ESF may not benefit, and which may even put them at a disadvantage owing to the differing ways in which the measure defines costs giving rise to an entitlement to subsidy, and to the fact that ESF funds are regarded as the firm's own income.

Are there any problems with the payment of the balance of the annual tranche for 1997 and the second advance for 1998, and if so, what?

Is the Commission aware of this Supplementary Training Allowance? What is its view of this measure which leads to discriminatory treatment between ESF and non-ESF projects?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(3 May 1999)

The request for final payment for 1997 of the Objective 3 programme could not be dealt with by the Commission in its initial version. The final version, on which the Commission and the Ministry for "Sociale Zaken en Werkgelegenheid" (SZW) have reached agreement, was sent to the Commission on 30 March 1999. However, the advances already paid exceeded the balance requested. Consequently, the 1997 payments for the Objective 3 programme may be considered as terminated. Payments to the sponsors are governed by the "Arbeidsvoorziening".

The second advance for 1998, submitted in early October 1998, was paid in two tranches because the Commission did not have the necessary funds. A first tranche of 38 million euros was paid towards mid-November 1998. The remaining sum of 26 million euros was paid by the Commission on 15 March 1999.

The Honourable Member does not provide enough information for us to answer the part of the question concerning the tax measure known as the Supplementary Training Allowance ("extra scholingsaftrek"). After examination by the "Arbeidsvoorziening", responsible for the day-to-day management of Objective 3, it seems that additional information would be needed to identify the project and the measures concerned. Naturally the Commission will be happy to provide more ample information to the Honourable Member if these particulars are communicated.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0961/99

by Anna Karamanou (PSE) to the Commission

(13 April 1999)

Subject: Organisation of impartial investigations into the disappearance of 3000 people in Algeria

According to Amnesty International, the problem of disappearances in Algeria has been shown to have intensified following revelations of arbitrary arrests and illegal detention. More particularly, during the last six years, about 3 000 men and women have disappeared and only very few of them have been traced following prolonged period of secret detention. The authorities and the security services are refusing to provide any information concerning the fate of detainees to their families, who are desperately searching not only hospitals and army camps but also mortuaries and graveyards for even the slightest clue as to their whereabouts.

What steps will the Commission take to launch a full, impartial and independent inquiry into all these disappearances and to ensure effective protection for human rights in Algeria?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission

(6 May 1999)

The Community is following political developments in Algeria closely, including security aspects.

The framework of relations between the Community and Algeria is defined by the Barcelona Declaration. The political section of the Declaration affirms a commitment to promoting the rule of law and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms in line with international law. Since Algeria has ratified most of the international acts relating to these principles, it is subject to the monitoring mechanisms established by those acts. The Algerian authorities allowed a panel of prominent figures designated by the Secretary General of the United Nations to visit Algeria from 22 July to 4 August 1998 to gather information on the human rights situation in the country, including the disappearances of Algerian citizens.

On the bilateral level, in addition to the usual diplomatic contacts, the Community and Algeria have been conducting political dialogue through ad hoc ministerial meetings, the most recent of which was held in Vienna in October 1998, where human rights issues, in particular the disappearances in Algeria, were discussed. Political dialogue between the Community and Algeria on these issues is being continued, and should be stepped up once an association agreement, for which negotiations began in 1997, is finalised. The agreement would institutionalise political dialogue and make respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms an essential element of contractual relations between the Community and Algeria.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0133/99

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(2 February 1999)

Subject: Implementation of rules on fishing in the Mediterranean by third countries

The EU has adopted certain technical measures (Regulation 1626/94)(1) for the conservation of fishery resources in the Mediterranean, including a ban on the use of inappropriate fishing gear and stipulation of the distance from the shore at which fishing is allowed, etc. These measures do not apply to fishing carried out in third countries with shorelines in the Mediterranean, such as Turkey, which produces a situation in which fishery resources are not effectively protected and competition is distorted by fishery products entering the market from that country.

In the light of the customs union agreement between the EU and Turkey, does the Commission consider that fishery products from Turkey may be made freely available on the EU market without that country complying with the rules applicable to Member States' fishermen? What measures will the Commission take in regard to Turkey and the other Mediterranean countries to persuade them to implement the technical measures laid down by Regulation 1626/94 so as to ensure effective conservation of Mediterranean fishery resources?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(12 April 1999)

The Community legislation in question is applicable to the vessels of countries bordering the Mediterranean, such as Turkey, only when they are operating in waters under the sovereignty or the jurisdiction of a Member State. Turkey applies its own rules on the conservation of fish stocks, which do not necessarily coincide with the Community legislation.

That said, there is no legal obstacle to the movement of fishery products of Turkish origin, provided they comply with the Community legislation on markets, including the health rules.

The Commission cannot oblige a third country to incorporate a Community regulation in its national legislation. What would be desirable is a certain degree of harmonisation between the legislation of the various Mediterranean countries, laying down minimum rules, but also leaving them the possibility of refining those provisions by adapting them to their regional circumstances. This process can take place only within the framework of the General Fisheries Council for the Mediterranean (GFCM), and it is within this framework that the Commission has initiated the necessary proceedings.

(1) OJ L 171, 6.7.1994, p. 1.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0189/99

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

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Serious damage resulting from the storm which occurred in the Canary Islands

During the first week of January 1999 a violent storm struck the Canary Islands and seriously damaged infrastructure installations which are essential to the functioning of the islands.

The damage caused by the storm has particularly affected the farms on the islands, port facilities and the road system.

The Canary Islands Government has set up a special committee to record the damage suffered and the value of the losses has been estimated at 16 500 million pesetas.

Is the Commission aware of the extent of the damage?

Is the Commission thinking of providing anything in the way of financial assistance in order to pay for the repair of the damaged infrastructure installations?

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

(16 March 1999)

The Spanish authorities have not yet sent the Commission any communication concerning the damage caused by the storm which struck the Canary Islands during the first week of January 1999.

At the next meeting of the Monitoring Committees for structural assistance on the Canary Islands, the Commission will propose that the national and regional authorities should look, in partnership, at the possible scope for reprogramming and whether existing resources could be allocated to implementing measures to rebuild the damaged infrastructure.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0169/99

by Jaime Valdivielso de Cué (PPE) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Trade

On 14 January 1999 the Commission asked the Council for authorisation to negotiate a dual system of customs controls on footwear from Vietnam with the Vietnamese authorities, since it suspected that Vietnam was being used by China, Thailand and Indonesia to evade anti-dumping measures imposed by the EU on their exports of such products.

Can the Commission say when that system will be put in place?

In what way will undertakings in this sector, which is of great social and economic importance in the European Union in general and Spain in particular, be compensated for the damage caused by the above-mentioned exports?

Answer given by Sir Leon Brittan on behalf of the Commission

(18 March 1999)

On 22 February 1999, the Council has formally approved the negotiation mandate for an agreement establishing a double-checking control on the importation of certain footwear products from Vietnam. The Commission will shortly initiate negotiations with the Vietnamese authorities, with a view to reaching an agreement by the month of April 1999.

The Council would then put the double-checking system in place on a provisional basis, pending the completion of the procedures for the formal conclusion of the agreement. Whilst the latter can take a considerable amount of time, the parties can agree by exchange of diplomatic notes on the provisional application of the agreement. This is expected to happen within one or two months from the initialling of the agreement, i.e. in May-June 1999.

No system of compensation of competing industries can be applied in this kind of cases, as there is no relevant Community legislation.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0364/99

by Joaquín Sisó Cruellas (PPE) to the Commission

(1 March 1999)

Subject: New experiments in training and employment

It appears that some experiments in job rotation in the Sicilian tourist industry have yielded positive results. This system operates in such a way that a certain number of workers from selected undertakings are enrolled on retraining courses involving training both in their home country and abroad. They are then replaced at the said undertakings by unemployed workers who have also undergone prior training. Once they have completed their retraining course, the workers return to their original undertaking with better skills more suited to the undertaking's requirements. The replacement workers return to the labour market, but with new work experience and additional skills.

Is the Commission aware of the job rotation system referred to above?

Can it say whether this system has been introduced in other Member States besides Italy, and to what effect?

Is the European Union in any way involved in such interesting "experiments" of this nature?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(8 April 1999)

The Commission is well aware of the job rotation system, and several projects addressing job rotation have received financial support in the framework of the Community initiative ADAPT.

In 1996, the Danish initiators of the job rotation system set up a core network called "A New track in Europe", consisting of 11 organisations from different Member States who all received ADAPT funding for their individual projects and for their transnational co-operation on job rotation. From 1998 onwards, the network as such has not received the European social fund (ESF) funding, but a number of individual projects have. The network now consists of 33 organisations having status as partners and representing 14 of the 15 Member States, including one organisation in Italy. In some Member States, job rotation projects have demonstrated their mainstreaming potential by influencing changes to existing training and job placement systems.

A copy of an interim report on the evaluation of Community job rotation prospects is being sent direct to the Honourable Member and to the Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0703/99

by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(26 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

The regions whose level of income per inhabitant is less than 75 % of that which corresponds to the average Community inhabitant are classed as "Objective 1 regions" and are entitled to substantial Community aid.

In order to work out whether this threshold has been crossed or not, the draft Council Regulation, COM(98) 0131 final(1), laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds, stipulates that the figures corresponding to the last three years on which Eurostat has information will be taken into account.

The Director-General of the Statistical Office of the European Communities (Eurostat) disclosed at the meeting of Parliament's Subcommittee on Monetary Affairs of 17 February 1999 that the statistical data corresponding to the financial years 1994, 1995 and 1996 already included the data corresponding to the hidden economy of the regions analysed, although he did not say exactly what criteria had been followed in order to estimate or assess this type of activity.

What proportion of the regional income corresponds to the "hidden economy" and what proportion to the "regular economy" in the Canary Islands in each of the years in question?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1.
It goes without saying that the Regional Policy DGs terms of reference remain the same and that its
responsibilities still include management of the Cohesion Fund. More generally, as provided for in Article158 (formerly Article 130a) of the EC Treaty and as confirmed by the Structural Fund regulations for thenext programming period, the overall objective of economic and social cohesion remains the primary aimof regional policy.
(2000/C 27 E/210) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1766/99
by António Campos (PSE) to the Commission
(11 October 1999)
Subject: The common agricultural policy
In his investiture speech, the President of the Commission undertook to ensure full transparency
concerning the use of Union funds, as well as full cooperation with Parliament.
In the interests of the promised transparency and cooperation, can the Commission provide information
on the following:
1. the level of total annual expenditure under the EAGGF (Guarantee), together with a list of the hundred
biggest beneficiaries in each Member State;
2. the percentage of total EAGGF (Guarantee) payments to each Member State corresponding to those
hundred beneficiaries;
3. the number of farmers benefiting from EAGGF (Guarantee) support in each Member State;4. the total number of farmers in each Member State.
Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission
(11 November 1999)
The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its
findings as soon as possible.
(2000/C 27 E/211) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1773/99
by Liam Hyland (UEN) to the Commission
(11 October 1999)
Subject: Commissions work programme for 1999 and new Commission
The work programme for 1999 of the Santer Commission pays particular attention to putting Agenda
2000 into effect in 1999. Does the Commission, under its new President, Mr Prodi, intend to alter thepresent work programme for 1999 and in view of the need to restore consumer confidence in a widevariety of essential foods, will the Commission agree to putting a new policy in place in favour of thefamily farm and rural society?
Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission
(25 October 1999)
The new Commission intends to give full effect to the 1999 work programme with regard to implement-
ing Agenda 2000.29.1.2000 EN C 27 E/171 Official Journal of the European Communities
(2000/C 27 E/104) WRITTEN QUESTION P-1474/99
by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission
(1 September 1999)
Subject: Management of waste oils
According to the Commissions answer (E-3211/97 of 5 February 1998 (1)) to my question concerning the
management of waste oils, ... the Commission will open a file ... on the basis of which it will contact the
Greek authorities in order to ask for information on the actual implementation in Greece of Directive 75/
439/EEC, as amended by Directive 87/101/EEC (2). When it receives a reply from Greece the Commission
shall not fail to invoke the powers conferred upon it by Article 169 of the EC Treaty, if appropriate.
What was the Greek authorities reply concerning the implementation of the above Directives, in particular
Articles 4 and 8 of Directive 87/101? Should Greece have failed to implement the Directives, will theCommission actually invoke the powers conferred upon it by Article 169 of the EC Treaty and when?
(1) OJ C 223, 17.7.1998, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 42, 12.2.1987, p. 43.
Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission
(7 October 1999)
The Commission has, on several occasions, asked the Greek authorities to provide information on the
implementation of Council Directive 75/439/EEC of 16 June 1975 on the disposal of waste oils, asamended by Council Directive 87/101/EEC of 22 December 1986. As the Greek authorities did not
communicate any information concerning this issue, the Commission has opened infringement procedings
against Greece on the basis of Article 226 of the EC Treaty (ex Article 169) for failure to provide theimplementation report required under Article 18 of the Directive.
(2000/C 27 E/105) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1475/99
by Ioannis Marínos (PPE-DE) to the Council
(1 September 1999)
Subject: Persecution of Gypsies in Kosovo
A few days ago, Euronews and RAI television broadcast pictures of the entire Gypsy community of Kosovo
abandoning the province en masse.
It is has been estimated that some 100 000 Gypsies living in Kosovo will be forced to abandon their
homes by the Kosovars, who are accusing them of being Serb collaborators.
What is the Councils position on this new round of ethnic cleansing whose victims, this time, are the
entire Gypsy community of Kosovo, who are suffering the same kind of persecution as the Serbs allegedlymeted out to the Kosovars and what measures will it propose to put an end to this persecution and toenable the people affected to return to their place of origin and their homes?
Reply
(8 November 1999)
The Council shares the Honourable Parliamentarians concern that the Serb and other non-Albanian
populations have to a large extent left or have been forced to leave Kosovo. The Council recalls thatUNSCR 1244 foresees the right to return of all refugees and displaced persons. The Council fully supportsthe efforts of UNMIK to promote reconciliation and cooperation between the various ethnic and othergroups in Kosovo and remains strongly committed to a democratic and multi-ethnic Kosovo.29.1.2000 EN C 27 E/85 Official Journal of the European Communities
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0197/99

by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Production of foie gras

What action is the Commission proposing to take with a view to stopping the cruel force-feeding of birds for the production of foie gras following the condemnatory report of the Committee of EU Animal Welfare Experts?

Joint answer

to Written Questions E-0079/99 and E-0197/99 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(18 March 1999)

The reason for the preparation of the scientific report on the production of foie-gras, was the discussion in the Council of Europe of recommendations on welfare of domestic ducks, and on muscovy ducks or hybrids of muscovy ducks, and on domestic geese in the context of the Convention for the protection of animals kept for farming purposes (to which the Community is a contracting party).

During 1998, the parties to the Convention agreed to wait for the Commission's scientific report before finalizing the recommendations on domestic ducks, muscovy ducks and geese (including "foie-gras" production). The first discussion on this subject took place during the meeting of the bureau of the Council of Europe standing committee on 22 February 1999 to prepare all the documents for the plenary session planned for the last week of June 1999.

Council Directive 98/58/EC of 20 July 1998 concerning the protection of animals kept for farming purposes(1) states, in Article 5, that the Commission shall submit to the Council any proposal which may be necessary for the uniform application of the European Convention and, on the basis of a scientific evaluation, any recommendations made under that scope.

Following the outcome of the discussions in the Council of Europe in the light of the above mentioned Directive, the Commission will prepare a proposal on the welfare of domestic ducks and geese.

(1) OJ L 221, 8.8.1998.