ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0232/98 by Antonios Trakatellis (PPE) and Giorgos Dimitrakopoulos (PPE) to the Commission (13 February 1998)

Subject: Reduction in CAP expenditure and adoption of measures to modernize agriculture

In view of the comprehensive overhaul of the Common Agricultural Policy and the future challenges facing it in the EU described by the Commission in Agenda 2000, will the Commission answer the following questions:

1. How much was made available by the regional funds to cover CAP expenditure and for structural interventions in the field of agriculture and stockbreeding in Objective 1 regions for the 1992-1997 period, broken down by year and Member State?

2. What is the percentage reduction of EAGGF, Guarantee Section, spending and how much is this in ecu compared with the overall budgets for the 1992-1997 period, broken down by year and Member State?

3. What was the trend in EAGGF, Guidance Section, spending (percentage and amounts) compared to total EAGGF spending and compared with the total budgets for the 1992-1997 period, broken down by year and Member State?

4. What measures as regards modernization, structural intervention and programmes did the Community take in respect of the CAP and what sums were made available for the implementation thereof from the budgets of the 1992-1997 period, broken down by year and Member State?

5. What measures and programmes were adopted for young farmers and the introduction of new technologies in farm holdings and in the stockbreeding sector and what sums were allocated during the 1992-1997 period, broken down by year and Member State?

6. Is there any correlation in absolute terms (ecu) between the reduction of agricultural spending of the EAGGF, Guarantee Section, and the development of modernization and intervention measures for agriculture for the 1992-1997 period, broken down by year and Member State?

7. What specific measures will be taken to check the steady decline in agricultural incomes and what steps can be taken to ensure the development of a modern, competitive and self -sufficient agricultural sector in the EU, faced with the challenges of international competition and the forthcoming enlargement of the EU?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (11 March 1998)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0364/98 by Fernando Fernández Martín (PPE) to the Council (19 February 1998)

Subject: Proposal for a regulation in the field of employment creation and support to small and micro-enterprises in the Mahgreb countries

The proposal for a regulation in the field of employment creation and support to small and micro-enterprises in the Mahgreb countries (COM(94) 0289) ((OJ C 214, 4.8.1994, p. 26. )) was submitted to the European Parliament in August 1994. The proposal required the application of the cooperation procedure, and for this reason the European Parliament gave it a first reading on 28 October 1994, submitting its amended proposal to the Commission on 22 December 1994. The Council's common position, which has been awaited since that date, has not been forthcoming.

What is the situation within the Council regarding this proposal for a regulation, and what is preventing the Council from reaching a common position?

Why is the proposal blocked?

Is there any indication of what the Council's common position might be?

Answer (11 May 1998)

The Council began examining the proposal for a Regulation to which the Honourable Member refers in his question, but did not complete it because it became unnecessary.

In fact, in the light of the conclusions of the Corfu and Essen European Councils on the priority strategic importance of the Mediterranean region and the establishment of a Euro-Mediterranean partnership which should receive substantial financial assistance, the Commission proposed a new form of financial partnership through the MEDA Regulation. That Regulation was adopted by the Council after consulting the European Parliament twice.

In its initial proposal, the Commission specifically referred in the recitals to the proposal mentioned by the Honourable Member, and to other Council Regulations concerning financial cooperation with Mediterranean countries, to indicate that the new draft Regulation replaced them.

In fact, Annex II to the MEDA Regulation, which sets out the objectives and procedures for the support measures, provides for support to small and medium-sized enterprises in the Mediterranean countries.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0112/98 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (30 January 1998)

Subject: Exemption of Greece from the ban on consumption of certain entrails

Commission Decision 97/534/EC ((OJ L 216, 8.8.1997, p. 95. )), as amended by Decision 97/866/EC ((OJ L 351, 23.12.1997, p. 69. )), prohibits from 1 April 1998 the use of material presenting risks as regards transmissible spongiform encephalopathies.

This Decision also bans the consumption in Greece of certain forms of entrails from sheep, goats and cattle despite the fact that Greece is free from transmissible forms of encephalopathies and not a single case of disease has appeared in the country.

If the above ban also applies to Greece, it will affect traditional eating habits which are part of local and national culture. Moreover, young local lambs and kids are used for some of these dishes and bonemeal is not used to feed the ruminants that cause this terrible disease. Will the Commission, therefore, consider exempting Greece from the above Decision under these stringent conditions?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (31 March 1998)

On 25 February 1998 the Commission approved a proposal to amend Commission Decision 97/534/EEC of 30 July 1997. The philosophy of the proposal is to require, pending scientific advice on the transmissible spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) status of each Member State, in Member States with native cases of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) removal of risk materiels appearing on a short list.

The Commission invited the Member States in the last standing veterinary committee to submit a complete dossier on their TSE status.

A copy of a press release is sent direct to the Honourable Member and to the Parliament's Secretariat.

During the Agricultural Council which took place 16-17 March 1998 the Commission proposal has been rejected. At the same time the Council invited the Commission to postpone the Decision 97/534/EC.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0152/98 by Leonie van Bladel (UPE) to the Commission (2 February 1998)

Subject: Rape of young remand prisoners in the Czech Republic

1. Is the Commission aware that in the Czech Republic prisoners are held on remand for excessively long periods (sometimes more than two years)?

2. Is the Commission aware that in the Czech Republic more than thirty remand prisoners are sometimes held in an area of some 40 square metres?

3. Does the Commission realize that remand prisoners in the Czech Republic include youths of less than 15 years of age?

4. Does the Commission realize that these children held in crowded cells are regularly the victims of rape (including gang rape) by adult remand prisoners?

5. Is the Commission aware that these rape victims run a high risk of becoming infected with HIV and thus, in effect, suffering the death sentence?

6. Can the Commission begin talks with the Czech authorities with a view to putting an end to this repugnant situation?

7. Is the Commission prepared to give the Czech authorities financial support in order to put an end to this abuse as soon as possible?

Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (16 March 1998)

The Commission is aware of the situation in Czech prisons.

The Commission continues to monitor closely the developments in the candidate countries of central and eastern Europe in order to ensure that upon accession they fulfil the criteria for membership which have been established by the European Council of Copenhagen in June 1993.

The Community assists the candidate countries in preparing for membership through its pre-accession strategy, in which the Phare programme plays a central role.

From 1998 on the Phare programming will be based on the priorities which the Commission has identified in the opinions on the candidate countries which it published in July 1997. These priorities are spelled out in the accession partnerships which the Commission has completed for each candidate country in February 1998.

The limited funds available and the need to select priorities from among a large number of relevant projects proposed for financing explain why currently no Phare funds are envisaged for financing of activities in Czech prisons. It is possible, however, for non-governmental organisations to apply for financing of projects relating to the rights of prisoners under the European initiative for democracy and human rights.

The Commission will bring the matter to the attention of the Czech authorities.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0067/98 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission (29 January 1998)

Subject: Fourth Action Programme to promote equal opportunities

It is striking that specifically those projects receiving funding from the Fourth Action Programme to promote equal opportunities have been subject to particularly meticulous scrutiny, especially by comparison with other EU aid programmes.

Does the EU have any reason to suppose that women's projects are particularly suspect?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (11 March 1998)

The Commission has no reason to suppose that women's projects are particularly suspect.

The careful auditing by the Commission of projects co-financed under the fourth action programme is not only in the interest of the European tax payer, but also in the interest of the Commission itself, because it obtains precious information thereon for its work and policies.

The fourth action programme is at present the subject of an audit by the Court of auditors which acts independently and in accordance with its own rules.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0021/98 by Karl von Wogau (PPE) to the Commission (29 January 1998)

Subject: Obstacle to the free movement of car alarm installations

Following a directive of June 1992 (92/49/EEC) ((OJ L 228, 11.8.1992, p. 1. )), insurance companies are free to set the conditions for insuring a car against theft. In practice this means that car alarm devices originally installed in the vehicles by the manufacturers have to be replaced when a car leaves the country in which it was manufactured, as the national insurance companies have difference requirements in every Member State. This situation becomes strange when even high-quality car alarms have to be replaced with systems that conform to the specifications of the national association of insurance companies and that are guaranteed for service only within the borders of one Member State. The result is higher costs and risks for consumers.

Concerning the registration and bringing into service of cars, a Directive which is compulsory for all new cars after 1 May 1996 lays down harmonized technical prescriptions for car alarms allowing the registrations in all Member States.

1. Does the European Commission agree that European technical standards would be useful to make these rules more operational?

2. Would the Commission be prepared to give the competent European standardization body a mandate to elaborate a technical standard for car alarms?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (9 March 1998)

The Commission would point out to the Honourable Member that harmonised European technical regulations already exist. Indeed, Council Directive 74/61/EEC, as last amended by Commission Directive 95/56/EC of 8 November 1995 adapting to technical progress Council Directive 74/61/EEC relating to devices to prevent the unauthorised use of motor vehicles ((OJ L 286, 29.11.1995. )), provides for harmonised technical requirements concerning vehicles fitted with alarm systems and the alarm systems intended for such vehicles. Therefore, since 1 January 1997, Member States may not refuse to grant Community type approval to vehicles thus equipped, or those alarm systems. The insurance companies are also required to comply.

As regards this area of motor vehicle design it is the traditional regulatory approach that the Commission follows under Article 100a of the EC Treaty. The Commission drew up the above-mentioned directive by harmonising the details of the national regulations. That directive was then transposed in the national laws of the Member States. It must be made clear that the requirements of the directive draw as far as possible upon European and international standards.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0867/98 by Armelle Guinebertière (UPE) to the Council (31 March 1998)

Subject: Netherlands' bill on the treatment of prostitution and procuring

The attention of the Council of Justice Ministers is drawn to a bill tabled by the Netherlands government in that country concerning the treatment of prostitution and procuring.

This bill lifts the ban on brothels, sets out a female sex workers' charter for so-called voluntary prostitutes and decriminalizes procuring. If it is passed, the bill is likely to set a European precedent.

Can the Council of Minister of the European Union accept legislation which undermines the inviolability and inalienability of the human body and repudiates the UN Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Persons and of the Exploitation of the Prostitution of Others of December 1949?

Answer (4 June 1998)

The Council is not competent to comment on bills submitted by the Member States' governments.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0316/98 by Wilmya Zimmermann (PSE) to the Commission (17 February 1998)

Subject: Common European holiday on 9 May

The Commission has made it clear, for example in its 'citizens' Europe' programme, that a greater effort is required to persuade the citizens of the European Union to identify with it.

The introduction of the common currency will be an important step in this direction, but a common public holiday could also be a great help. The European flag and hymn would be backed up by a unifying symbol which would be of benefit to the entire citizenry of Europe.

9 May would be a very appropriate day (the day following the anniversary of the end of the Second World War, and the day on which in 1950 Robert Schuman made his declaration which led to the foundation of the Coal and Steel Community).

1. Has the Commission drawn up any proposals to this effect?

2. What is its view of the proposal that the European public holiday be introduced by common action in the Member States on 9 May 2000?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (14 April 1998)

Together with Parliament and through its representations and offices in the Member States, the Commission supports and encourages events organised to mark 9 May.

In 1997 the Commission supported 4 500 actions and events; in some cases it made a financial contribution.

This year 9 May will again be marked in all the Member States by a variety of means - exhibitions, distribution of material to schools, speeches, competitions, advertisements on public transport, cultural events.

The Commission is making a special effort to stimulate and encourage initiatives associating young people and their teachers with the commemoration of 9 May, especially in schools.

Some Member States will link Schuman Day activities with the euro by organising public exhibitions, lectures, debates, etc.

Despite its belief in the importance of commemorating Schuman Day, the Commission cannot propose 9 May as a public holiday at this would be outside its remit.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0568/98 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission (4 March 1998)

Subject: EU ban on the import of meat from hormone-treated animals (ruling of the WTO Appeals Panel)

Pursuant to the ruling handed down by the WTO Appeals Panel, the EU is entitled to introduce, on a scientific basis, what it feels is an appropriate level of consumer protection which may be more stringent than that derived from international public health standards.

1. For which specific areas must the required scientific evidence for possible risks be produced?

2. Which experts have been commissioned by the EU to provide this evidence?

3. How much money is available for these scientific studies?

4. Are the Member States involved as well?

5. What scientific studies are to be carried out, and when will they begin?

6. With what level of funding and with what measures is the federal government supporting the scientific case against meat treated with hormones?

Joint answer to Written Questions P-0487/98 and E-0568/98 given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (30 March 1998)

The Appeals Panel of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) has endorsed the Community's right to lay down a higher level of consumer health protection than that required by international standards, provided the measures are based on an assessment of the risks. Moreover the Appeals Panel has confirmed its opinion that the ban on using hormones in the Community was not based on a sufficiently specific risk assessment, notably as regards the carcinogenic and genotoxic aspects of hormone residues in animal meat.

The Community has informed the WTO of its intentions as regards the implementation of the Appeal Panel's recommendations and decisions of 30 March 1998.

Currently the Commission is deliberating how best to meet its international obligations. At this stage the Commission cannot yet answer questions as precise and detailed as those asked by the Honourable Member.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0230/98 by Panayotis Lambrias (PPE) to the Commission (13 February 1998)

Subject: Under-performance and downgrading of the National School for Public Administration in Greece

According to allegations made by the students' association of the National School for Public Administration (ESDD) in Greece, the ESDD is under-performing and is being downgraded. Given that the ESDD is funded by the European Union and that funding covers the construction of a building (75%) and its operational costs (90% from the Kleisthenis Programme), will the Commission say what measures it intends to take to ensure that the ESDD functions efficiently and that the funds which the European Union has allocated - and continues to allocate - for this purpose are well used?

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

The National school for public administration is indeed supported by the structural funds through the operational programme 'Modernisation of the public service' (Kleisthenis). More specifically, for the second Community structural funds (CSF) programming period 1994-1999, 8.3 MECU have been allocated by the European social fund (ESF) for the introductory training of public officials, whereas the European regional development fund (ERDF) has committed 0,55 MECU for the development of databases and network infrastructures for the above school. No funds have been allocated towards buildings for this school.

Through its participation in the programme's monitoring committee, the Commission aims to influence the quality of training offered by the National school for public administration. It is worth mentioning that the monitoring committee has decided to launch studies for the modernisation and up-grading of the school, as well as the evaluation of the training offered to civil servants. On the basis of the conclusions of the studies, measures should be planned to improve the operation of the school and the quality of services it gives. The execution of the studies has however been seriously delayed.

As the Honourable Member knows, the implementation of operations supported by the structural funds lies with the national authorities. The Commission will continue its efforts as regards the up-grading of the National school for public administration, and, in the framework of the mid-term review exercise which is under way, will pay particular attention to the quality of action already agreed.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0575/98 by Gérard Caudron (PSE) to the Council (3 March 1998)

Subject: Motorway driving in thick fog

Another tragedy has occurred on a motorway in foggy weather.

In less than two years the Lille-Ghent motorway has been the scene of two major pile-ups, which killed around fifty people and injured even more. The accidents happened in extreme weather conditions.

These are clearly not isolated incidents in the European Union - the statistics speak for themselves.

It is quite clear that appeals to drive carefully in order to avoid the worst are ignored.

Can the Council give its views on the possibility of closing motorways temporarily when there is thick fog?

Can the Council say whether it intends to take steps which may put an end to these lethal accidents on motorways in particularly thick fog?

Answer (28 May 1998)

Improving transport safety is a priority in common transport policy, as laid down in Article 75(c) of the Treaty, and is central to the Council's concerns.

With regard to road safety in particular, the Council adopted conclusions at its meeting on 17 and 18 June 1997 on the Commission communication 'Road safety in the European Union * the programme for the years 1997-2001.'

In its conclusions, the Council lays down a number of guidelines aimed at facilitating the promotion of road safety at both national and Community levels.

However, it should be noted that the power to make proposals is conferred by the Treaty on the Commission and that the specific measures to which the Honourable Member refers fall within the sphere of competence of the Member States.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0516/98 by Paul Rübig (PPE) to the Council (27 February 1998)

Subject: 8th European Development Fund

Under the Lomé IV Convention the eighth European Development Fund was to have been launched at the end of 1997. It is to be used for financial and technical cooperation in removing structural imbalances in the countries benefiting from the Lomé Convention. The emphasis has been placed on poverty alleviation, training and industrialization, but also on health, the improvement of competitiveness and agriculture. For the first time Austria was also to participate in this programme.

However, it proved impossible to launch the eighth European Development Fund on the appointed date, and its launch continues to be delayed because not all the Member States on the European Council have ratified the plan.

Can the Council describe the substantive reasons for this delay?

When, in the Council's view, is the plan likely to be finally ratified?

Answer (18 May 1998)

Pursuant to Article 360(1) of the Fourth Lomé Convention, as revised by the Mauritius Agreement of 4 November 1995, the Convention will come into force on the first day of the second month following the date of deposit of the instruments of ratification of the Member States and of at least two thirds of the ACP States, and of the act of notification of the conclusion of the Convention by the Community.

This condition has now been fulfilled both by the ACP States and by the fifteen Member States. At its meeting on 27 April 1998, the Council adopted the Decision concerning the conclusion of the Agreement amending the Fourth Lomé Convention. The revised Convention will therefore come into force on 1 June 1998.