ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION P-3256/97 by Riccardo Garosci (UPE) to the Commission (9 October 1997)

Subject: Increase in VAT rates in Italy

What position is the Commission adopting and what, if any, steps does it intend to take vis-à-vis the Italian Government, which recently increased the rates of VAT, in blatant contrast with the EU guidelines on harmonizing tax rates?

In particular the Italian motor vehicle industry, which is so important as a source of jobs, would be helped if the VAT on cars purchased by companies were deductible.

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (12 November 1997)

According to the information available to the Commission so far, the new Italian measures on VAT rates are fully in line with the sixth VAT Directive 77/388/EEC ((OJ L 145, 13.6.1977. )) and especially with the articles 12(3)(a), 28(2)(i) and Annex H thereof. The Commission welcomes the abolition of the so-called parking rate as a move towards a simpler and more harmonised system of VAT rates which corresponds to its plans for a new common system of VAT.

The situation is less clear with regard to the deductibility of input tax on new cars. The Commission is currently studying whether or not the new provisions are compatible with Community legislation. In this context it is noteworthy that the Commission is also working on a proposal for a Council directive aiming at more harmonisation in this area, as under the sixth VAT Directive some Member States are allowed to exclude the deduction of input tax whereas other are not.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3266/97 by María Estevan Bolea (PPE) to the Commission (20 October 1997)

Subject: Management of hazardous waste

According to EU figures, 30 million tonnes (1992 figure) of hazardous waste are produced every year, of which 16.5 million tonnes a year (55%) are properly processed. Out of the latter amount, 7.5 million tonnes a year are incinerated.

How many tonnes of hazardous waste are burned at European cement works? Could the Commission give a breakdown by Member State?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (1 December 1997)

The use of hazardous waste as a fuel substitute in industrial plants is covered by Council Directive 94/67/EC on the incineration of hazardous waste ((OJ L 365, 31.12.1994. )). Under this Directive any operation requires a permit which is granted if the applicant can demonstrate that the emission limit values set out in Article 7 will be met. In addition, after the start of the operation, a six month period of measurements, under the most unfavourable conditions anticipated, is mandatory to show compliance with the provisions of Article 7. These requirements entered into force on 31 December 1996 for new operations and will apply to existing operations from June 2000.

In the last ten years the practice of recovering energy from waste by burning waste as a substitute fuel has increased to promote the reduction of primary fuel consumption in industry, particularly in cement production. The cement industry is an energy-intensive process in which primary fuel may account for 35% of the direct cost of production.

The Commission does not have access to data concerning the quantity of hazardous waste used as a substitute fuel in cement manufacture in the Community. This kind of data will be covered by the exchange of information on the implementation of Directive 94/67/EC which will not be available until June 2001, in accordance with the provisions of Directive 91/692/EEC on the standardising and rationalising of reports on the implementation of certain Directives relating to the environment ((OJ L 337, 31.12.1991. )).

However, according to data currently available in the year 1996 some 170 million tonnes of cement were produced in the Community. Since 120 kilograms of 'hard coal equivalent' is needed to produce 1 ton of cement, 20.4 million tonnes of 'hard coal equivalent' were used in 1996. Approximately 12% of fossil fuel was replaced by waste. The equivalent of waste, in terms of heat value, would be around 3 million tonnes of waste in order to replace approximately 2.5 million tonnes of 'hard coal equivalent'. The estimated share of hazardous waste is 40%. Therefore, some 1.2 million tonnes of hazardous waste were probably co-incinerated in cement kilns in the Community in the year 1996. Most of the hazardous waste co-incinerated was used oil.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3736/97 by Yves Verwaerde (PPE) to the Commission (21 November 1997)

Subject: Aid to victims of recent events in the Congo Republic

Has the Commission arranged for any financial support for the victims of recent events in the Congo Republic.

If so, can it supply me with a statement of the operations already carried out and a financial breakdown of the corresponding aids?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-3736/97 and E-3738/97 given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission (16 December 1997)

The Commission's position on recent political events in the Republic of Congo (Brazzaville) is that presented in the statement issued by the Council Presidency on 3 November 1997, on behalf of the European Union. A copy of this statement will be sent directly to the Honourable Member, as well as the Parliament Secretariat.

The Commission would like to take this opportunity to point out that, since the onset of military exchanges, it has provided funding for emergency humanitarian aid to four organisations: Médecins sans frontières (France and the Netherlands), Médecins du monde (France), Secours catholique (France) and the International Committee of the Red Cross. Throughout the conflict and until today, these programmes have meant that the basic needs of around 350 000 of the most vulnerable of the displaced persons can be provided for.

The Commission, in co-ordination with the main humanitarian organisations, is carefully monitoring the situation locally, in particular with regard to Brazzaville's water supply.

The funding granted to date is spread over a number of sectors and comes in total, if one includes contributions to the World Food Programme, to around ECU 10 million.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3238/97 by Bill Miller (PSE) to the Commission (20 October 1997)

Subject: Excise Duty Harmonization

Can the Commission give an assurance that the issue of excise duty harmonization will not be allowed to drag on but will be accorded a measure of priority in order to allow growth in this vital sector?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (18 November 1997)

The Commission has already made numerous proposals in the excise field which would have produced the measure of harmonization necessary for a tax system in keeping with the needs of an internal market. However, where Council has adopted proposals, it has done so only after considerable amendment, which has meant that harmonization still falls well short of what is required to reap the full benefits of an internal market.

Against that background, the Honourable Member will recognize that, while the harmonization of excise duties remains a priority area for the Commission, it can give no assurance that the current situation will be radically changed in the near future.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-3494/97 by Carmen Díez de Rivera Icaza (PSE) to the Commission (29 October 1997)

Subject: The Euro and commissions charged on currency exchanges

A high-level Spanish Government official responsible for economic matters stated that the possibility of financial institutions charging a commission when converting the current peseta into Euros as of 1 January 1999 had not been discounted.

Since this exchange is to be obligatory for all Member States adopting the Euro from the start, can the Commission confirm whether or not this possible practice would be a matter at the discretion of each Member State, and if so, can it give a clear assurance that the obligatory exchange would not involve any additional cost to European citizens?

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission (4 December 1997)

Although the draft Council Regulation on the introduction of the euro ((OJ C 236, 2.8.1997. The Council has reached unanimous agreement on this text. However, in view of its legal basis (Article 109l(4)), it cannot be formally adopted until the list of Member States participating in the euro is known. )) does not deal directly with the question of conversion charges, it provides material for an answer to the Honourable Member's question.

Article 8(3) of the draft in fact obliges banks to convert into euros all amounts credited to their customers' accounts. It applies both to essential conversion operations during the transitional period between 1999 and 2001 (e.g. in cases where the debtor's account and the creditor's account are denominated in different currencies, one in euros and the other in national currency) and to the definitive changeover of bank accounts in 2002.

As regards compulsory acts, there is every reason to believe that the conversions will be carried out free of charge for customers. This also applies to the definitive conversion in 2002 of notes and coins in national currency into euros.

It should, however, be noted that Article 8(3) does not cover all the questions arising in connection with conversion charges. For example, the invoicing arrangements between 1999 and 2001 for services in euros requested by banks' customers remain an open question, as does the exchange of notes and coins between currencies participating in the euro area in the period from 1999 to 2001.

In order to examine these matters, the Commission set up in the spring of 1997 a working group composed of representatives from all the interested parties: banking and professional associations, consumer groups and public authorities. The objective is to determine by the end of the year whether a common approach is required on the part of all the participating Member States and to spell out, also by the end of the year, what needs to be done, if anything, in terms of legislation or a code of conduct.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3486/97 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Council (3 November 1997)

Subject: The Warsaw Convention and an Essex resident held hostage in Kuwait - claim against British Airways

Given the long-standing complaint from Essex resident Mr Edward Hammett and 367 passengers of British Airways flight 149, that the airline recklessly and intentionally landed in Kuwait after the Iraqi invasion in the Gulf War, does the Council agree that the draft regulation concerning compensation to passengers in cases of air accidents sets a precedent in favour of a European Union competence in relation to the Warsaw Convention? Will the Council therefore commit itself to supporting a new regulation which would enable the European Commission to investigate the potential liability of air carriers in relation to complaints other than those arising from accidents, whether or not particular aspects of the Warsaw Convention apply?

Does the Council agree that complainants such as Mr Hammett could only benefit if such legislation were passed?

Answer (12 February 1998)

The Council would remind the Honourable Member that the subject dealt with in the draft regulation concerning compensation to passengers in case of air accidents to which he refers is in fact covered by Council Regulation (EC) No 2027/97 of 9 October 1997 on air carrier liability in the event of accidents (OJ L 285, 17.10.1997, p. 1). The Regulation will enter into force one year after its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

The Council has not so far received any proposals to amend that Regulation and therefore clearly cannot prejudge its position regarding the content of any such amendments that may be made.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3208/97 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Council (15 October 1997)

Subject: Abolition of duty-free areas in the EU

It has been decided that the duty-free areas in the EU will be abolished in less than two years. This decision is expected to have major economic implications, including a severe impact on employment.

Has any study been carried out into the precise economic implications of abolishing the duty-free areas and into the number of jobs that will be lost, directly or indirectly, at a time of particularly severe unemployment in the EU?

Answer (20 January 1998)

The Community does not intend to abolish the duty-free areas mentioned in Articles 166 to 181 of the Community Customs Code (Council Regulation (EC) No 2913/92 * OJ No L 302, 19.10.1997).

The question no doubt relates to the abolition of duty-free sales after 30 June 1999, for which the Council would ask the Honourable Member to refer to its Reply to Written Question No 1515/97 and the replies to Oral Questions Nos H-0133/97, H-0508/97 and H-0707/97.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2125/97 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission (23 June 1997)

Subject: Novel food regulation No 258/97 - Safety tests

In the event of authorization being given for a genetically modified plant line pursuant to the varieties directive, following thorough testing of the change in its metabolites are all plants resulting from crops-breeding from this line tested for possible metabolitic change?

Supplementary answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (1 December 1997)

Under the current Community provisions on the common catalogue of varieties of agricultural plant species and on the marketing of vegetable seed (70/457/EEC and 70/458/EEC respectively) ((Council Directive 70/457(EEC), 29.9.1970, OJ L 225, 12.10.1970; as last amended by the Act of Accession Austria, Finland, Sweden. )) a plant variety is officially accepted for certification and marketing only if it is distinct, stable and sufficiently uniform. A variety shall be regarded as distinct if, whatever the origin, artificial or natural, of the initial variation from which it is has resulted, it is clearly distinguishable in one or more important characteristics from any other variety known in the Community.

Where Commission decisions concerning the placing on the market of genetically modified plant material, seed included, are required, these are based on the examination of the relevant dossier submitted under Council Directive 90/220/EEC on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms ((Council Directive 90/220(EEC), 23.4.1990, OJ L 117, 8.5.1990. )) having taken into account all the information forwarded by the Member States and found that the information on the environmental risk contained in the dossier is sufficient to enable the Commission to take a decision on the placing on the market.

Under the plant variety legislation, there is at present no requirement for the conduct of an environmental risk assessment for genetically modified plant varieties. This task is undertaken under Directive 90/220/EEC. Under the plant variety legislation, testing for metabolic changes would only be required where this is relevant to the assessment of distinctness among varieties.

However, the Commission proposal of 1993 for the amendment of seed marketing directives ((OJ C 29, 31.1.1994. )) aims, among other objectives, to integrate the process of environmental risk assessment with the procedure of variety acceptance. After the recent opinion given by the Parliament, this proposal will be amended as follows:

(a) in the case of a genetically modified variety, an environmental risk assessment similar to that laid down in Directive 90/220/EEC will be carried out;

(b) the procedures ensuring that the environmental risk assessment referred to in (a) above is similar to that laid down in Directive 90/220/EEC shall be introduced on a proposal from the Commission in a Council regulation based on the appropriate provisions of the EC Treaty;

(c) the technical and scientific details of the implementation shall be adopted in accordance with the standing committee procedure.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3579/97 by Klaus Lukas (NI) to the Commission (13 November 1997)

Subject: Berlaymont

According to a report in 'Europe' No 7078 (n.s.) of 13/14 October 1997, the Commission's Berlaymont building in Brussels has been entirely recontaminated during renovation work.

Can the Commission shed light on this matter and provide information as to who is responsible for this recontamination and what the associated costs and consequences shall be?

In view of the current situation, what would the cost of a completely new building have been?

What will the real cost of renovation be?

Can one assume that the further renovation works now required will not leave the building once again completely contaminated?

What are the financial consequences of the fact that the move will now not take place in the year 2000 as planned?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (17 December 1997)

The press articles on the subject of asbestos removal at the Berlaymont were inspired by a report commissioned by SA Berlaymont 2000, the company responsible, from Technip, a French company instructed to make an inventory and proposals for completion of the work. The report states that certain areas of the building have been recontaminated because the work has not been carried out to proper standards.

The Commission cannot be called to account for the management of the site. The Belgian State - via the Régie des bâtiments in the first place and secondly via SA Berlaymont 2000 - is responsible for the work. The Commission is no more than an observer, but it has on several occasions commented on the quality of the work.

The current operation to remove the asbestos is unavoidable, whatever the future of the Berlaymont - restructuring or demolition and rebuilding. Demolition is in any event impossible before removal of the asbestos. The only work currently in hand is the removal of asbestos. Restructuring work will start on completion of this phase of work and after a final decontamination certificate has been issued.

The main effect of delays in the work is that asbestos removal will probably not be completed before mid-1999, and the renovation before the end of 2001. Since the agreement with the Belgian State provides that all the costs of asbestos removal are to be borne by the Belgian State, which is also to provide replacement premises for at least six months after delivery of the renovated Berlaymont, there will be no impact on the Commission budget.

The Berlaymont Task Force was set up within the Commission to monitor the renovation project after removal of the asbestos, and to cooperate on the definition of the project with the SA Berlaymont 2000 team. The Commission undertaking to finance the restructuring of the Berlaymont - estimated at ECU 325 million plus ECU 50 million (value of the building before renovation) - and to become the owner on completion of the work is still subject to delivery of a decontamination certificate.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3412/97 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission (28 October 1997)

Subject: Application in Italy of European legislation on waste disposal

In its answer to Written Question E-2350/97 ((OJ C 117, 16.4.1998, p. 12.)) the European Commission said that some aspects of Italian legislation conflict with Directive 91/156/EEC ((OJ L 78, 26.3.1991, p. 32.))on waste disposal and that there are specific cases which are currently the subject of infringement proceedings.

Can the Commission:

1. specify which aspects of Italian legislation are incompatible with Directive 91/156/EEC;

2. say which specific cases are at present the subject of infringement proceedings?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (5 December 1997)

Infringement proceedings against the Italian authorities are currently under way with regard to the non-conformity of Italian legislation with Council Directive 91/156/EEC ((OJ L 78, 26.3.1991. )) amending Directive 75/442/EEC ((OJ L 78, 26.3.1991. )) on waste. The content of the infringement proceedings is confidential. The main breach concerns the exclusion of some categories of waste from the scope of national legislation.

The specific cases that are the subject of infringement proceedings regarding the disposal of waste concern the abandoning of non-authorised waste in a protected area (Vallone di S. Rocco), the conformity of Italian legislation with Council Directive 94/67/EC on the incineration of hazardous waste ((OJ L 365, 31.12.1994. )), and the conformity of Italian legislation with Council Directive 91/689/EEC on hazardous waste ((OJ L 377, 31.12.1991. )) and with Council Directive 94/62/EC on ((OJ L 365, 31.12.1994. )) OJ L 194, 25.7.1975.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3333/97 by Yiannis Roubatis (PSE) to the Council (23 October 1997)

Subject: Conviction of Esber Yamukdereli and the continued violation of human rights in Turkey

In an article in the Turkish newspaper Sabah of 29 September 1997, the Turkish Foreign Minister, Ismail Cem, described Article 8 of the so-called anti-terrorism law as a 'disgrace'. In an interview with the German newspaper 'Bild' on 22 September 1997, the Turkish Prime Minister himself, Mesut Yilmaz, acknowledged that the laws on the protection of human rights needed radical change. On 1 October 1997, the Turkish President, Suleyman Demirel, said that it was a matter of priority 'to put an end to the disgrace of human rights violations'. Despite all these statements being made during the first week of October, a blind 52-year old Turkish lawyer, Esber Yamukdereli, known for his defence of numerous dissidents in the Turkish courts, was sentenced to 23 years imprisonment by the Ankara Court of Appeal under Article 8 of the anti-terrorism law.

1. What practical measures will the Council take to secure the immediate release of Esber Yamukdereli and to compel the Turkish Government to repeal all the legal provisions which even its own officials call a 'disgrace'?

2. How long will the Council tolerate the mockery, inconsistency and untrustworthiness of successive Turkish governments, which have been promising for two years to repeal all legal provisions used to violate human rights and restrict freedom of thought and which serve as a pretext for depriving Turkish citizens even of life itself?

3. Does the Council not believe that it is unthinkable to strengthen relations any further between the Union and Turkey while this situation persists?

Answer (26 January 1998)

1. The Council deeply regrets the sentence imposed on the lawyer Mr E. YAMUKDERELI. Although the prison sentence was postponed for one year on health grounds, the Council appealed to Turkey to commute postponement to definitive release.

2. The Council points out that freedom of expression is a universal fundamental right that every democratic country has a duty to guarantee. It will have no hesitation, in its contacts with the Turkish authorities, in condemning any violation of fundamental rights.

3. The position of the Union with regard to respect for human rights in Turkey was recently confirmed at the European Council meeting in Luxembourg on 12 and 13 December 1997.

In particular, the European Council recalled that strengthening Turkey's links with the European Union also depended on that country's pursuit of the political reforms on which it has embarked, including the alignment of human rights standards and practices on those in force in the European Union.