ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1710/96 by Monica Baldi (UPE) to the Commission (17 June 1996)

Subject: Implementation of Directive 91/414/EEC by Italy

Council Directive 91/414/EEC ((OJ L 230, 19.8.1991, p. 1. )) of 15 July 1991 was issued with the aim of establishing EU standards in respect of the use of plant protection products.

The Directive stipulates that plant protection products may not be placed on the market and used unless they have been authorized by the Member State following inspection.

The Directive does not contain any requirement to submit data concerning the use of plant production products by means of appropriate forms or registers.

Although Italy has issued a relevant legislative decree, it has not fully implemented that decree (No. 194 of 17 March 1994 'implementing Directive 91/414/EEC concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market') since it has not yet adopted appropriate national plans to assess and control the impact of the use of such products on public health and the environment.

1. Does the Commission agree that the different provisions currently applied in Italy by virtue of Ministerial Decree No. 217 of 25 January 1991 and Presidential Decree No. 236 of 24 May 1988, aimed at requiring all plant protection products to be declared and registered before use, failing which legal sanctions should apply, are incompatible with the aforementioned Community legislation?

2. Does the fact that Italy requires datasheets and stock registers to be kept in respect of plant protection products not constitute a distortion of competition and trade between States that is contrary to the common interest?

3. Would the judicial and administrative authorities be justified in repealing the aforementioned provisions, which is contrary to Community legislation on the use of plant protection products, in accordance with the consistent rulings of the Court of Justice?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (2 July 1996)

The Commission has received from the Italian authorities the notification concerning the measures taken for the implementation of Directive 91/414/EEC. It will examine in detail these provisions in the light of the questions raised and inform the Honourable Member on the outcome of this examination.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1607/96 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (24 June 1996)

Subject: Commission support for and consultation with the European Disability Forum

Could the Commission indicate precisely its arrangements to provide support for and advice to, and to ensure consultation with the newly independent European Disability Forum?

How many meetings will it organize between the Forum and Member State representatives compared to the three per year at present, and what format will these take?

How will the Commission ensure that all directorates-general consult the Forum in advance about relevant legislative proposals?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (17 September 1996)

As stated in its recently adopted communication on equality of opportunity for people with disabilities ((COM(96) 406 final. )), the Commission welcomes the recent establishment of the new European disability forum which brings together disability organisations from all Member States representing the vast majority of disability interests in the Community. Its statutes have been signed by European non governmental organizations (NGOs) and the national councils currently involved in Helios II. The new forum will have the opportunity of working closely with the European institutions on a proactive basis. For its part, the Commission pledges to cooperate actively and meet on a regular basis with the European disability forum, with a view to consolidating the cooperation which has been built up with a wide range of NGOs in recent years.

In order to facilitate dialogue initiated under the auspices of the Helios II programme, the Commission proposes to arrange for a joint meeting at least once a year between the European disability forum and the high level group of Member States' representatives on disability.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1280/96 by Salvador Jové Peres (GUE/NGL) and Pedro Marset Campos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (24 May 1996)

Subject: Wine imports from third countries

Recently, the Community wine market has been stagnant, particularly in certain areas. Nevertheless, wine imports from third countries have been increasing, especially from Argentina.

These imports could produce a very difficult situation as regards this year's harvest.

How does the Commission plan to control these imports?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1280/96, E-1324/96 and E-1328/96 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (18 June 1996)

The Commission has also noted that imports of wine from non-Community countries, and especially from Argentina to Spain, have increased considerably in the last year.

The Commission learnt from the press of rumours according to which certain irregularities had been committed in this respect. It would point out that Member States are responsible for import checks and that it has reminded them on a number of occasions of the need for national supervisory bodies to monitor imports closely.

Although to date the Commission has not received any official complaint concerning fraudulent imports, it has contacted the national supervisory bodies to draw their attention to these imports in particular and the subsequent use of the wine in the trade chain. The supervisory bodies have also been instructed to conduct a survey of these imports, the results of which are still pending.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1596/96 by José Apolinário (PSE) to the Commission (24 June 1996)

Subject: Aid granted by the Government of Galicia (Spain) to local potato producers

Is the Commission aware of the aid granted by the Government of Galicia (Spain) to local potato producers, which enables them to place their produce on the Portuguese market at prices which Portuguese producers find impossible to match?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (9 July 1996)

The Commission is not aware of any State aid granted by Galicia's regional government to potato producers.

However, as the potato market is not governed by common organization of the market arrangements, the provisions of Regulation No 26 applying certain rules of competition to production of and trade in agricultural products apply. ((OJ 30 of 20.4.1962. )) Only the provisions of Article 93(1) and (3), first sentence, of the EC treaty are applicable. Thus, the Commission can only make observations and cannot therefore prohibit State aid for this product.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1834/96 by Heidi Hautala (V) to the Commission (28 June 1996)

Subject: Consequences of annulment by the Court of Justice of the decision of the Agriculture Council (C-303/94)

On 18 June 1996 the Court of Justice annulled the decision of the Agriculture Council (94/43/EC) concerning the right of the Member States to pollute their surface and groundwaters beyond the limits already set.

The annulment implies that the Commission and Member States must take the protection of human health and the environment seriously. The new Member States have a particular problem because they must now allow for a far more extensive variety of pesticides to be imported and used in their agriculture than before their accession to the European Union.

In the fifth environmental action programme the Commission promised to make proposals on a gradual reduction in the use of pesticides in agriculture. Instruments which could be used are taxes on pesticide use, certificates for farmers using less pesticides and in particular the so-called substitution principle, as practiced in Denmark and Sweden and as now proposed in the biocide directive, which is under consideration.

Will the Commission now draft a new Annex VI to the basic directive (91/414/EEC ((OJ L 230, 19.8.1991, p. 1. )) incorporating taxes, certificates and the substitution principle as a means of reducing the use of pesticides in agriculture and the damage caused by their use?

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

The Commission has noted that the Court of justice has annulled Council Directive 94/43/EC of 27 July 1994 ((OJ L 227, 1.9.1994. )) establishing Annex VI to Directive 91/414/EEC ((OJ L 230, 19.8.1991. )) concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market.

Article 4 of Directive 91/414/EEC provides general requirements for the Member States when authorizing plant protection products. The annulled Directive sought to set out these requirements of the basic Directive in more detail.

In the light of the Court's judgement the Commission intends to forward rapidly to the Council a new proposal for such detailed requirements, to be included as Annex VI to the Directive, in order to ensure that the proper functioning of the Directive is no longer interrupted than strictly necessary. Such a proposal however cannot introduce taxes, certificates or the substitution principle since this would require an amendment of the basic Directive itself.

Moreover, in the framework of the fifth environment programme a study is under way on the sustainable use of plant protection products and, in particular, on the most appropriate instruments to reduce use of plant protection products. This will permit the development, where necessary, of proposals further to integrate environmental considerations in agricultural policy.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1830/96 by Roberto Mezzaroma (UPE) to the Commission (2 July 1996)

Subject: Trans-European trains

There have been many complaints from members of the Italian communities scattered throughout the EU Member States that, during the Christmas, Easter and summer holidays, the trains which the Italian railways put on for Italian workers returning to Italy from their place of residence abroad are not only extremely old, but are also, for some inexplicable reason, in a state of almost complete dilapidation. This is a cause of justified anger on the part of people who are already obliged to put up with the inconvenience of living outside their country of origin.

This situation is a clear case of discrimination or, at the very least, points to a basic disregard for Italian citizens resident abroad. It is also damaging to Italy's image within Europe.

Does the Commission intend to approach the Italian Ministry of Transport and the Italian railway authorities with a view to ensuring that better quality rolling stock is used for such trans-European trains, given that all Italian citizens - even those living abroad - have a right to the same standards of transport.

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission (25 July 1996)

The Commission believes strongly that citizens of the Community should have access to high quality public transport and that is the central theme of its recent green paper on the citizens' network ((COM(95) 601 final. )). However, it has to point out that commercial and operational decisions, such as that on the use of rolling stock, are the responsibility

of the railways' own management. In addition it is Community policy to encourage managerial independence as a means of raising the competitiveness of rail transport relative to other modes of transport. Consequently, while fully understanding the problem raised by the Honourable Member, the Commission regrets that it cannot approach the Italian ministry of Transport or the Ferrovie del Stato on this question. It will, however, continue to pursue modifications to the Community's regulatory framework designed to improve the performance and service of railways. Meanwhile, the complaints raised by the Honourable Member are best taken up with the authorities in Italy.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1006/96 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (26 April 1996)

Subject: Participation by 'Thames Gateway' region in EU regional projects

What discussions has and will the Commission undertake with the British Government and with representatives of local authorities and social partners regarding the participation of the Thames Gateway sub-region (formerly East Thames Corridor) in European Union regional programmes?

Does the Commission accept that this project represents 'the largest regeneration project in Europe' and what initiatives does it plan in this respect?

Supplementary answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (4 July 1996)

The Thames Gateway falls within a number of United Kingdom standard regions. Areas within it are eligible for a number of programmes cofinanced by the structural funds, such as objective 2 in East London and Konver in Essex. The Commission has had numerous contacts with representatives of the relevant regions and the British government in the context of these programmes. However, this has been without any specific reference to the Thames Gateway.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1381/96 by Jesús Cabezón Alonso (PSE) and Juan Colino Salamanca (PSE) to the Commission (6 June 1996)

Subject: Spanish fruit destroyed by French farmers

In the final days of May this year, groups of French farmers again attacked European lorries transporting Spanish fruit in transit for European Union countries. They also destroyed Spanish fruit already in French markets.

What action has the Commission taken to prevent any recurrence of these extremely serious incidents?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1254/96, E-1268/96 and E-1381/96 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (27 June 1996)

The Commission has already, on a number of occasions, stated its views on the systematic acts of violence perpetrated by various French producer groups or organizations against consignments of fruit and vegetables from Spain and the obligation of Member States in that connection to maintain public order, with particular reference to the right of free movement of goods.

As it said in its answer to written question 1818/94 from Mr Colino Salamanca, ((OJ C 24, 30 January 1995, p. 30. )) under Community law Member State authorities are required to take the measures necessary to prevent acts which undermine the effective operation of the internal market and the free movement of goods. Failure to comply with this duty constitutes a breach of a Member State's obligation under Article 30 and the common organization of the market, in conjunction with Article 5 of the EC Treaty.

Since the French authorities have been unable to show unequivocally that the police took adequate and appropriate action to counter this quite unacceptable impediment to the free movement of goods, the Commission initiated infringement proceedings under Article 169 of the Treaty and ultimately, on 4 August 1995, referred the matter to the Court of Justice. ((Case C-265/95. ))

Following the recent recurrence of these violent attacks on the free movement of goods the Commission reminded the French authorities of their obligations under Articles 5 and 30 of the EC Treaty, and it will be drawing the Court's attention to the persistent repetition of the offence.

The Commission does not believe the reform of the common organization of the market will extend the strawberry problem to other sectors, on the contrary, it should help and encourage Community producers to meet the challenges ahead and become more competitive and capable of adapting to a changing market.

Agreements and contacts between producers in different Member States should also play an important part in organizing the marketing of Community produce. Accordingly, as an incentive to promote operational measures by groups of Member States, the threshold for official financing of the operational funds provided for in the reformed common organization of the market is to be raised to 60%.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1877/96 by Joan Colom i Naval (PSE) to the Commission (28 June 1996)

Subject: Execution of the Structural Funds

There has recently been renewed reference, albeit without exact data, to an increase in the number of budget commitments still awaiting execution and to the incapacity of Member States to absorb Community funding, especially in the area of the Structural Funds. With a view to clarifying the situation, can the Commission provide information as to:

- what results are available for the execution of the Structural Funds in 1994 and 1995, with details for commitment appropriations, broken down by Member State for each of the Funds, of the divergences from the initial forecasts;

- what commitments under the Structural Funds are still awaiting execution, with details of the share corresponding to each Member State and of the programming period in which the commitments concerned originated?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (16 September 1996)

The Commission is sending direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat a table containing the information requested.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1608/96 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (24 June 1996)

Subject: Follow-up to the EU's Helios Programme

What plans does the Commission have for continuing information and public awareness activities on disability issues in 1997, given the forthcoming end of the EU Helios Programme?

In particular, will the Commission continue, extend or restrict its support for the European Day of Disabled People, the Helioscope publication and for the production of newsletters by NGOs?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (17 September 1996)

As the Commission has pointed out in its Communication on equal opportunities for the disabled of 30 July 1996 ((COM(96) 406 final. )), one of the Commission's priorities is to heighten awareness on developments in the Member States and at Community level.

In this connection the Commission recognises the significant contribution of the European Day of Disabled People - launched in 1993 - in sensitising public opinion to the rights of the disabled. The Commission will continue to support this Day in partnership with the Parliament and other Community institutions.

In is also intended to continue with the national information days organised annually in each Member State, which have demonstrated the positive impact of the Helios II programme at national level and have done much to improve the dissemination of information and the evaluation of activities, and to heighten public awareness.

The growing success of the review 'Helioscope', which is published in the 11 Community languages, is in large measure due to the fact that it is a platform for discussion among disabled people, who write articles on current issues of relevance to them. Hence the Commission intends to continue publishing Helioscope.

As to the sectoral newsletters published by the European non-governmental organisations, it is up to these NGOs and to the new Independent Forum of the Disabled to feature these newsletters in their programmes of work to be submitted to the Commission, with an eye to receiving financial support.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1811/96 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission (5 July 1996)

Subject: EUROPALIA 1997

Will the Commission say: Is the European Union contributing in any way whatsoever to organizing the Europalia-Turkey 1997? Has any provision been made for Community funding? If so, does the Commission intend to ensure that historical truth is respected, particularly as regards the genocide of the Armenians, a matter on which the European Parliament has adopted a resolution?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (13 September 1996)

Since the Belgian foundation 'Europalia' was set up, the Commission has provided financial support for a variety of its activities aimed at increasing familiarity with the culture of countries such as Mexico, Portugal and Austria.

The foundation bears the sole responsibility for decisions relating to the choice of country and artistic and cultural programming.

The 'Europalia-Turkey' festival has been cancelled.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1966/96 by Giorgio La Malfa (ELDR), Raimondo Fassa (ELDR) and Luciano Pettinari (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (16 July 1996)

Subject: Promotion of fairness and solidarity in trade relations

Following the adoption of the Langer report on fairness and solidarity in trade relations (A3-0373/93 ((OJ C 44, 14.2.1994, p. 119. ))), has the Commission taken any concrete action to promote such practice?

Can it give details of the measures already taken to this end and those to be taken in the future, together with any financial support provided?

Lastly, how does it intend to ensure that any support measures do not discriminate against fair trade organizations which do not belong to European associations such as EFTA within which, as is well known, the organizations already present have a substantial right of veto over the accession of other organizations from the same countries?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission (24 September 1996)

The Commission jointly finances operations by European non-governmental organizations (NGOs) which are designed to promote fair trade. It also helps foster coordination among organizations and networks at the European level by measures designed to encourage participation by the various private-sector, NGO, consumer and Member State interests concerned.

The last four years have seen a marked rise in the number of jointly-financed campaigns by NGOs to raise public awareness of fair trade issues in Europe. From 1992 to 1995 the Commission provided joint financing for 28 such projects in 11 Member States, to a total value of ECU 3.6 million, as well as cofinancing fair-trade projects in developing countries aimed at enabling small growers or manufacturers to improve production and marketing, in association with promotion of their exports in Europe.

Since 1994 the Commission has been organizing conferences, seminars and other activities designed to develop links between European fair-trade organizations, distribution networks and representatives of the Member States.

The Commission's cofinancing arrangements are non-discriminatory and any NGO eligible under the normal rules can apply. The steady increase in applications from bodies in almost all Member States reflects the Commission's readiness to continue supporting various European networks such Max Havelaar, the European Fair Trade Association, Transfair or News as well as individual organizations.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1540/96 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (17 June 1996)

Subject: Second CSF - railway network in Greece

Under the national provisions of the second CSF for Greece, funding has been earmarked for the railway network. It concerns mainly the Athens-Patras-Thessonoliki link forming part of the trans-European rail network. It is projected that 88% of the Athens-Thessonoliki line will be double-track, considerably reducing the length of the journey, but new rail links will be built and the Korinthos-Patras line will be modernized.

1. What was the uptake of appropriations for 1994-1995?

2. What were the principal causes for any delay in utilizing the funds?

3. Can information be given concerning progress on the project itself?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (2 August 1996)

The uptake of the railway operational programme included in the Greek Community Support Framework (CSF) for 1994-99 was 40% for 1994 and 34% for 1995.

The rate at which projects are carried out will be raised by the establishment, in June 1996, of Ergose, the subsidiary of OSE which will manage implementation of railway projects cofinanced by Community funds and by the recruitment of a project manager who will assist.

So far 36 km of twin track has been built, 30 km of line has been renewed and ten level crossings have been built on the Athens-Thessaloniki line. A number of other jobs are in progress on the same line.