ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1042/98 by Jens-Peter Bonde (I-EDN) to the Commission (6 April 1998)

Subject: Particular advantages for national minorities in elections

Is a provision of an electoral law giving a national minority in a Member State a particular advantage in connection with parliamentary elections, local elections and elections to the European Parliament etc. in contravention of the Amsterdam Treaty?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (5 June 1998)

The Commission is conducting a detailed investigation of the problem raised by the Honourable Member and will inform him of the outcome as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0332/98 by Karin Riis-Jørgensen (ELDR) to the Commission (17 February 1998)

Subject: Directive 90/313/EEC on the freedom of access to information on the environment

In its answer of 6 January 1998 to Written Question E-3586/97 ((OJ C 174, 8.6.1998, p. 79. )) the Commission states that the Member States are required, under Article 6 of Directive 90/313/EEC on the freedom of access to information on the environment ((OJ L 158, 23.6.1990, p. 56. )), to ensure that bodies with public responsibilities for the environment and under the control of public authorities make information on the environment available on the same terms and conditions as public authorities.

Private organisations and undertakings carrying out public nature protection tasks involving, for example, threatened and sick animals, are not necessarily covered by the condition in Article 6 that they must be subject to the control of public authorities. Does the Commission believe that this is compatible with the objective of Directive 90/313/EEC? Furthermore, should there in its view be any doubt at all about private organisations and undertakings with public responsibilities being covered by the Directive?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (26 March 1998)

Council Directive 90/313/EEC of 7 June 1990 on the freedom of access to information on the environment ((OJ L 158, 23.6.1990. )) ensures freedom to information held by the public authorities. It also ensures its dissemination and sets the basic conditions for making it accessible. To that end, Article 3 stipulates that Member States must ensure that public authorities are required to make available information relating to the environment to any natural or legal person at his request and without his having to prove an interest. In accordance with Article 6 of the Directive, this obligation also applies to bodies with public responsibilities for the environment and under the control of public authorities.

Under the current terms of the Directive, only public authorities and bodies with public responsibilities for the environment under the control of public authorities are required to make the information they hold on the environment available to the public. In her question, the Honourable Member specifies that the organisations and bodies to which she refers fail to meet one of the conditions set out in Article 6. The inference must therefore be that they are not covered by that Article.

With regard to the last part of the question, the Commission has insufficient information to be altogether sure of the focus of the Honourable Member's concern. Without further details it cannot provide a useful answer.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0542/98 by James Nicholson (I-EDN) to the Commission (4 March 1998)

Subject: State earnings related pension scheme

The United Kingdom government has recently changed the law with regard to the State Earnings Related Pension Scheme (SERPS) so that any woman widowed on or after 6 April 2000 will only received half of her husband's SERPS.

Does the Commission believe that this change in the law contravenes Article 119 of the Treaty (equal opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment)?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (3 April 1998)

As regards the problem raised by the Honourable Member, the Commission wishes to point out that in the field of social protection Member States are free to adopt their own policies as regards the organisation and operation of social security schemes, provided they comply with Community law governing equal treatment of men and women (Article 119 of the EC Treaty, Directives 79/7/EEC ((OJ L 6, 10.1.1979. )) and 86/378/EEC ((OJ L 225, 12.8.1986. )) as amended by Directive 96/97/EC ((OJ L 46, 27.2.1997. ))) and the social security of migrant workers (Article 51 of the EC Treaty and Regulations (EEC) Nos 1408/71 and 574/72, as amended by Regulation (EC) No 118/97 ((OJ L 28, 30.1.1997. ))).

Hence Member States may, as in this particular case, adopt rules laying down the level of the different benefits, provided the above-mentioned Community legislation is respected.

The new rules in the United Kingdom governing the award of survivors' benefits which will take effect on 6 April 2000 do not infringe existing Community law and, more specifically, they do not fall foul of Directive 79/7/EEC (equal treatment for men and women in matters of statutory and legal social security schemes) - particularly since this Directive excludes survivors' benefits from its scope.

Article 119 of the EC Treaty does not apply to statutory schemes. It concerns only equal pay for male and female workers and covers only occupational social security schemes.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0474/98 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (27 February 1998)

Subject: Regional Support Contracts in future structural fund programmes

What is the Commission's response to the proposal for Regional Support Contracts to be agreed between the Commission, Member States and designated areas as equal partners for future structural fund programmes after 1999? Does the Commission agree that such contracts agreed in advance of negotiations about SPDs would ensure higher levels of participation from organisations and individuals within regions as well as facilitating greater congruence with existing regional economic development programmes, thereby ensuring maximum effectiveness of the funds?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (6 April 1998)

The Commission considers that 'regional support contracts' would risk duplicating the strengthened consultative arrangements already proposed by the Commission for the period after 1999. These arrangements include enlargement of the current definition of partnership to include regional, local and environmental authorities and any others concerned by the programme, including those responsible for equality; a confirmation of the application of this principle at each stage of the programming process; the Commission to appraise each development plan proposed, taking into account the opinion of the partners, and the measures proposed for associating them at Community support framework/single programming document level; and a clearer definition of the roles and responsibilities of the partners in the field of monitoring and evaluation.

Under these proposals, all the partners would therefore participate throughout the programming process, up to and including negotiations on actual programming documents and on any arrangements necessary for a smooth transition from the current programming period to the new.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0574/98 by Edouard des Places (I-EDN) to the Commission (4 March 1998)

Subject: Agricultural guidance law

In France the draft agricultural guidance law, which has been submitted by the Minister of Agriculture to the farming associations, provides, in title I, for the introduction of 'Territorial Farming Contracts' (CTE).

These contracts would be signed with the administrative authority, cover all farming activity, comprise a programme of measures taking into account production targets for goods and services, area management and environmental protection and would be consistent with national and regional guidelines.

The explanatory statement for Article 3 on the establishment of a fund to finance the CTE clearly specifies that this fund will initially be financed by national appropriations and subsequently by appropriations generated by adjustment of CAP aids resulting from the reform.

With regard to the budgetary process, does the Commission consider that it will be possible to transfer the portion of funding resulting from the adjustment of a COM to other forms of agricultural production, whether or not they come under another COM?

Will not the very principle of these Territorial Farming Contracts lead to a certain degree of renationalization of the CAP and destroy the agricultural policy logic inherent in all the COMs?

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

The Honourable Member is referred to the Commission's answer to his written question P-514/98 ((See page 77. )).

The Commission endeavours to ensure consistency between its policy on State aid to agriculture and the objectives of the common agricultural policy, in particular by ensuring that national aid does not interfere with the mechanisms of the common organisations of the market.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0481/98 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (27 February 1998)

Subject: Use of experts to evaluate structural fund bids and performance

Could the Commission list the number of external experts it recruited in 1997 to advise on applications for and evaluations of structural fund programmes and break down this total by nationality and gender? What proportion of these experts received formal training on the EU's requirements concerning structural fund programmes prior to undertaking this work? What was the total cost of their work in 1997? Which recruitment measures did the Commission use to ensure openness, transparency and non-discrimination?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (27 April 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-0884/98 by Bill Miller (PSE) to the Commission (26 March 1998)

Subject: Length of time to reply to correspondence

What is the average length of time that it takes an official of the Commission to respond to correspondence from a Member of the European Parliament?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0882/98, E-0883/98 and E-0884/98 given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (14 April 1998)

The Commission ensures that all correspondence is answered as quickly as possible. Much depends, however, on whether or not the reply needs to be translated, whether different departments have to cooperate in the drafting, and on the technical nature of the matters raised.

In the interests of effective cooperation between institutions, it has been decided that a letter from a Member of Parliament should normally be answered within three weeks. If a letter from a Member of Parliament is registered by the Commission's mail department on arrival, that department, which is part of the Secretariat-General, will monitor replies and send a reminder to the departments concerned if they fail to answer within the time limit. This procedure will not be affected by the approach of the millennium.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0226/98 by Armelle Guinebertière (UPE) to the Commission (13 February 1998)

Subject: Community derogation for tax reduction on fuels used by fire and emergency services

At present, local authorities are responsible for financing both investment and operating costs of departmental fire services. This represents a substantial financial burden, at a time when tax on fuels is increasing and is therefore affecting the operation of fire and emergency services. These services are exempted from road tax requirements; they should also be granted a tax reduction on fuel.

However, the French Government considers that such tax reductions for fire services are not applied in any other EU Member State and that such a request for a Community derogation, which would require unanimous approval, is not in line with the aim of harmonizing tax within the EU.

How does the Commission view the idea of introducing measures to reduce tax on fuel used by fire and emergency services?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (15 April 1998)

The taxation of mineral oils in the Community is governed by the provisions of Council Directive 92/81/EEC on the harmonization of the structures of excise duties on mineral oils ((OJ L 316, 31.10.1992. )).

That Directive contains no Community provision which allows specific exemptions or reductions in duty for public service vehicles such as those mentioned by the Honourable Member. However, it is possible for a Member State to request a derogation using the procedure set out in Article 8(4) of the same Directive. Any such request is subject to approval by the Commission and all other Member States.

At present, no Member State has been granted a derogation under this procedure to give special treatment to vehicles used by the fire services although Italy has such a derogation for ambulances and Greece for the national police force, according to Council Decision 97/425/EC of 30 June 1997 authorizing Member States to apply and to continue to apply to certain mineral oils, when used for specific purposes, existing reduced rates of excise duty or exemptions from excise duty, in accordance with the procedure provided for in Directive 92/81/EEC ((OJ L 182, 10.7.1997. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1245/98 by Leonie van Bladel (UPE) to the Council (28 April 1998)

Subject: Distribution of free euro-calculators to those on low incomes

1. Is the Council aware that introduction of the euro will entail extra costs for consumers as they will be forced to purchase pocket calculators?

2. Will the Council take steps to ensure that those in lower income groups, including the elderly and retired, receive pocket calculators free of charge?

3. What other extra costs will consumers face as a result of introduction of the euro?

4. Will the Council ensure that those in lower income groups, including the elderly and retired, do not have to bear these other extra costs, if any?

Answer (6 July 1998)

1. The Council does not intend to arrange for pocket calculators to be distributed to those in lower income groups when the euro is introduced as the single currency of participating Member States, either free of charge or otherwise.

It should be noted in this connection that it is up to the Member States to conduct, possibly with assistance from the Community budget, the information policy which they consider most appropriate to facilitate the introduction of the euro.

2. As regards extra costs that consumers might face as a result of the introduction of the euro, the Council, at its meeting on 2 May 1998, welcomed the attention paid to the practical aspects of the introduction of the euro and considered that the recommendations of the Commission of 23 April 1998 on banking charges for conversion to the euro and on dual display of prices and other monetary amounts can form a useful complement to the relevant national preparations.

The rules of good practice thus recommended by the Commission which are based on the principles that conversions from the national currency unit to the euro unit should in principle be free of charge and that rounding to the nearest cent must be adhered to, were considered to be helpful by the Council in facilitating the transition to the euro, in particular in the light of ongoing consumer concerns.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1525/98 by Bertel Haarder (ELDR) to the Council (11 May 1998)

Subject: Staff regulations for officials of the European Communities

In the light of the critical attitude towards the Union in many Member States and of the current reform of the Staff Regulations for EU officials, will the Council support initiatives to amend the Staff Regulations for EU officials so that, irrespective of the category of post, such officials seconded to the Commission's and Parliament's information offices in their own country of origin are employed as local staff for the duration of their secondment?

Answer (13/14 July 1998)

The Council would remind the Honourable Member that, in accordance with Article 24 of the Treaty establishing a Single Council and a Single Commission of the European Communities, the Staff Regulations of officials of the European Communities are adopted by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, on a proposal from the Commission and after consulting the other institutions concerned.

To date, the Council has not received any proposal from the Commission to include in the Staff Regulations specific proposals concerning officials seconded to the Commission's and Parliament's information offices.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0321/98 by Iñigo Méndez de Vigo (PPE) to the Commission (17 February 1998)

Subject: EU-subsidized Prince Programme

In 1997, the Commission organized a series of meetings to inform the public about the scope and contents of the Intergovernmental Conference and the Amsterdam Treaty.

Can the Commission provide me with a list of the Spanish MEPs who attended the meetings held in Spain with EU funds provided under the Prince Programme?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (6 April 1998)

The Commission is sending the list of main events organised as part of the Information Programme for European Citizens (Prince) direct to the Honourable Member and Parliament's Secretariat.

However, it should point out that in some cases it has not been possible to state which Member(s) took part in these events as requests for Members to attend had, in some cases, to go through the secretariats of the political groups, in accordance with the cooperation procedure in force between the Commission Representation and Parliament's Office in Spain.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0775/98 by Joan Colom i Naval (PSE) to the Commission (5 March 1998)

Subject: Commitments still outstanding in structural actions

Can the Commission supply the following information relating to the situation as at 31 December 1997:

- The amount of commitments still outstanding in the EAGGF Guidance Section, FIFG, ERDF, ESF and the Cohesion Fund, with a breakdown by Member State and an indication as to whether the appropriations were committed in 1997, 1996, 1995, 1994 or earlier.

- The relation between the amount of appropriations awaiting disbursement in each member State and the level of commitments accumulated in each Member State in the period 1994-1997.

- A comparative analysis of changes in the disbursement of commitment appropriations, payment appropriations and commitments still outstanding.

- The amount of commitments still outstanding on 31 December each year in relation to the commitment appropriations allocated each year for the period 1994-1997.

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (29 April 1998)

Because of its volume, the information requested is being sent direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.

The Honourable Member's attention is drawn to the fact that the situation as regards outstanding commitments under the Structural Funds, which are multiannual operations and where clearance of the commitments is spread over several years, can be regarded as normal.

As can be seen from figure 1 in the document sent direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat, the pattern of outstanding commitments and their volume develop in parallel to the commitments made. It can also be seen that while the growth of outstanding commitments between 1997 and 1996 (+10%) is higher than the growth of commitments (+4%), the annual growth rate of outstanding commitments for the period 1994 to 1997 has slackened considerably (see figure 2).

It should also be noted, as shown by figure 3, that at 31 December 1997 almost 90% of the outstanding commitments originated during the current programme. Most of the commitments prior to the present period have been cleared.

Lastly, the Commission would inform the Honourable Member that it is currently working on cumulative 1994-97 data relating to the utilisation of Structural Fund appropriations in terms of commitments and payments and to the trend in outstanding commitments by Fund and by Member State. Once the work is completed, the results will be communicated to the budgetary authority.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0862/98 by Ursula Schleicher (PPE) to the Council (31 March 1998)

Subject: Implications of the ban on tobacco advertising

Does the directive mean that using the names or trademarks of tobacco products in any way for other products is in principle to be regarded as 'circumventing' the advertising ban?

If so, does this also apply in cases where names are coincidentally the same (e.g. 'St Moritz' is the name of a health resort and of a brand of cigarettes) and where the brand name of the non-tobacco product is older than that of the tobacco product?

If not, who decides or is required to prove that contravention is intentional?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0856/98, E-0857/98, E-0858/98, E-0859/98, E-0860/98, E-0861/98 and E-0862/98 (13/14 July 1998)

As the Honourable Member is aware, following a detailed debate in second reading on 13 May 1998, the European Parliament approved the Council's common position on the Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to the advertising and sponsorship of tobacco products without making any amendments to it. The Council consequently adopted the Directive at its meeting on 22 June 1998.

With particular reference to the questions raised by the Honourable Member, it should be emphasized that, when discussing the Commission proposal, the Council took great pains to produce a text which took into account both the efficient operation of the internal market and the requirements of ensuring a high level of health protection.

The reasoning which guided the Council's work on the proposal for a Directive was explained in detail in the recitals and in the statement of reasons which were sent to the European Parliament before its second reading. It will be for the Member States to adopt appropriate provisions to ensure that the Directive is so implemented as to enable the desired objectives to be attained.

The Council would remind the Honourable Member that it is for the Commission to ensure application of the measures adopted by the Institutions pursuant to the Treaty and that the Court of Justice is competent to interpret them and to ensure that they comply with the Treaty.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0898/98 by Daniela Raschhofer (NI) to the Commission (26 March 1998)

Subject: Permanent Representations of the European Union

In filling the posts for the Task Force on enlargement to the east, the quetion of appointing the heads of the Permanent Representations in the applicant countries has also been under discussion.

1. Have these positions already been filled?

2. What criteria were applied in making the appointments?

3. Has the Austrian Federal Government displayed any particular ambitions for any of these posts?

4. Will the Permanent Representations remain if one or other of these countries is not admitted to the EU?

5. Are there Permanent Representations in Norway, Switzerland and Turkey?

Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (22 April 1998)

1. The posts of head of delegation in the candidate countries are, with one exception, filled.

2. The posts are filled by the Commission in the same way as all middle management posts. Attention is given to the particular nature of the role of the Commission's external service.

3. The post of head of delegation in Slovakia is reserved for an Austrian national.

4. Yes.

5. The Commission is represented in Norway and Turkey but not in Switzerland, as the Commission's delegation in Geneva is accredited not to the Swiss government but to the international organisations there.