ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3645/97 by Clive Needle (PSE) to the Commission (13 November 1997)

Subject: The rise in the incidence of tuberculosis

The World Health Organization has just published a worrying and unprecedented report on the rise in the incidence of tuberculosis. This specifies a number of developing countries plus Latvia, Estonia and the Russian Federation as 'hot spots' where tuberculosis is resistant to antibiotics and treatment is described as 'therapeutic anarchy'.

Clearly this has implications for several aspects of EU policy and practice in the context of its public health competence as established in Article 129 of the Treaty on European Union.

Will the Commission therefore set out urgently its approach to tackling tuberculosis with particular reference to research and development of new anti-tuberculosis drugs and treatment?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (13 January 1998)

Research into tuberculosis is one of the priorities of the research programme in the field of biomedicine and health.

During the 4th Framework Programme for RTD ((OJ L 117, 8.5.1990. )), six European research networks were set up, mainly to carry out research into resistance to medication, the development of new vaccines, and also molecular epidemiology, which particularly involves partners in developing countries and in Eastern Europe.

The fight against re-emerging infectious diseases, including tuberculosis, is explicitly outlined in the objectives of the 5th Framework Programme for RTD ((COM(97) 142 final. )) proposed by the Commission, particularly in the objective entitled 'Unlocking the resources of the living world and the ecosystem', key action 'control of viral and other infectious diseases'.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3694/97 by Kirsi Piha (PPE) to the Commission (19 November 1997)

Subject: Utilization of PHARE appropriations for Slovenia

The European Union aids the countries of Central and Eastern Europe through its PHARE programme. A great deal of aid has presumably been provided from this programme for the development of the countries which have applied for membership of the EU. Can the Commission provide details of the utilization of appropriations granted under PHARE in 1997 for Slovenia?

Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (19 December 1997)

The Commission informs the Honourable Member concerning the Phare programme in Slovenia in 1997 as follows:

Under the Phare national programmes the proposed country operational programme 1997 (17.75 MECU) was adopted by the Slovene government on 17 July 1997 and presented to the Phare management committee on 2 October 1997. The table reflects the proposed overall division of funds for the COP 1997:

>TABLE>

Another additional budget allocation of 1.25 MECU is foreseen for the Tempus programme.

Under the cross border cooperation programmes (CBC) 6 MECU have been allocated for cooperation with Italy and Austria in 1997. The allocation of funds is as follows:

>TABLE>

The overall Phare budget for Slovenia committed in 1997 is 25 MECU.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3231/97 by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE) to the Commission (20 October 1997)

Subject: Irregularities by the Greek Ministry of Culture in awarding contracts for projects funded by the European Union

Allegations have been made to the effect that the Greek Ministry of Culture has infringed a number of the provisions of Directive 92/50/EEC ((OJ L 209, 24.7.1992, p. 1. )) and other Community rules for example Article 85 of the Treaty concerning competition, in awarding six contracts to carry out studies for the consolidation of archaeological sites in Athens, a project receiving Community funding.

For example, the allegations refer to discrimination between applicants, the fact that the offices to which finally the study was awarded submitted their proposals after the deadline, together with other procedural infringements and irregularities, all of which were disregarded by the Greek Ministry of Culture. Complaints have also been made by the Greek Technical Chamber and one of the injured parties has referred the matter to the Commission, which, nine months later, has not yet replied.

Is the Commission aware of this situation and what measures will it take to ensure compliance with Community law, together with transparent and proper use of Community funds by the Greek authorities?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (7 January 1998)

The Greek Ministry of Culture published two invitations to tender, in June 1995 and in March 1996, concerning the award of six contracts to carry out studies for the consolidation of archaeological sites in Athens. The results were announced simultaneously for all the studies in July 1996. In January 1977, one of the applicants who had been eliminated during the tendering stage complained to the Commission that Directive 92/50/EEC relating to the coordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts had been infringed.

According to the complainant, the contracting authority had infringed the principle of non-discrimination provided for in Article 3(2) of Directive 92/50/EEC because it had rejected certain tenders, including the complainant's, on the grounds of failure to comply with the administrative formalities while, at the same time, accepting other tenders which also had presentational shortcomings.

The information provided by the complainant does not reveal any infringement of Directive 92/50/EEC. The complaint concerns purely procedural aspects - compliance of tenders with internal administrative formalities - which applied to all applicants. The complainant does not provide any evidence of discrimination against certain consultancy firms, such as acceptance by the contracting authority of tenders with shortcomings which resulted in other applicants being excluded, a practice which could undermine Directive 92/50/EEC and the principle of non-discrimination.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3825/97 by Roberto Mezzaroma (UPE) to the Commission (28 November 1997)

Subject: Protection of artists in Europe

What does the Commission intend to do- or has it already done -to ensure a decent standard of living for those artists, writers, journalists, sculptors, painters and musicians who have promoted the arts in their own countries and in Europe by their efforts, thus contributing to its gradual integration;in particular, what is done to ensure that those artists who do not earn enough to make a living, and who do not receive welfare payments or have access to suitable premises in which to exercise their talents, receive financial support to provide them with an adequate standard of living?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (8 January 1998)

The Commission recalls that social, economic and legal protection of artists and professionals is primarily the responsibility of the Member States. Moreover, it stresses that, in several cases, the laws and rules applicable to the matter are not sectoral in character.

Under Article 128 of the EC Treaty, which relates to culture, the Community has the task of supporting and supplementing action by the Member States through accompanying measures without harmonising their laws and regulations. Here, existing Community cultural programmes - Kaleidoscope, Ariane and Raphael - all endeavour, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, to contribute to the development and advancement of the artistic professions.

A number of provisions adopted under other Community policies directly or indirectly encourage employment or call for a high level of protection (for example, with regard to intellectual property) for the categories referred to in the question, as can be seen from the first report on the consideration of cultural aspects in European Community action ((COM(96) 160 final. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-4121/97 by Gerhard Hager (NI) to the Commission (16 January 1998)

Subject: Declaration on sport

In making the declaration on sport at Amsterdam, the Member States for the first time acknowledged the special significance of sport.

1. What measures is the Commission planning to put this declaration into practice?

2. In my experience, Eurathlon often poses virtually insurmountable organizational problems for small clubs and associations in particular, despite the fact that their contribution to popular sport is a significant one. Is the Commission aware of such problems?

3. Are further programmes being planned to support popular sport in such a way as to enable small clubs and associations to participate in them, too?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (2 March 1998)

1. The Commission is preparing a communication on sport in the Community for Parliament and the Council. It will take into account not only the declaration on sport included in the Treaty, but also Ms pack's report on sport which has been adopted by Parliament. The communication will contain a series of proposals relating to possible Community action in the area.

2. The Commission is aware of the problems set by the Eurathlon programme. An audit will therefore be carried out on the programme this year for submission to the budgetary authority. The audit will cover the financial and organisational aspects of the programme.

3. The conclusions drawn from the communication and the audit will enable the Commission to put forward new proposals relating to programmes for sport.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3764/97 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI), Gastone Parigi (NI) and Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (21 November 1997)

Subject: Uniform safety standards for treatment in hyperbaric chambers

Eleven people died in a tragic incident in the hyperbaric chamber at the Galeazzi Institute in Milan. Although health matters are the responsibility of the Member States, the Maastricht Treaty has afforded some possibility for the Union to wield influence. Will the Commission therefore draw up a Directive stipulating that no patients may be admitted to any hyperbaric chamber in the Union unless they have first taken off their own clothes and put on overalls or some other garment appropriate for the treatment to be administered? Will it likewise make provision in the Directive to lay down uniform Community-wide safety standards for all hyperbaric medicine centres?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (21 January 1998)

The hyperbaric chambers used in hospitals in order to treat certain pathologies in atmospheres at high pressure and, in general, heavily enriched with oxygen are 'medical devices' within the meaning of Council Directive 93/42/EEC of 14 June 1993 concerning medical devices ((OJ L 169, 12.7.1993. )), and are therefore covered by that Directive.

The Directive contains technical requirements that are to be met if the products concerned are to be placed on the market and in service. They are classified as being for high-risk use and in this case the Directive provides for mandatory certification by an independent third party (notified body) in respect of the device's design and manufacture.

The health and safety protection requirements to be met cover the familiar relevant aspects of the safe use of hyperbaric chambers and, in particular, the risk of fire or explosion during normal use, the hazards associated with compatibility with other medical devices under an oxygen-rich atmosphere, together with the need to provide users with information on their use, and the precautions to be taken.

Moreover, hyperbaric chambers are subject to protection requirements relating to the hazard arising from pressure. These are covered by a Parliament and Council harmonising directive (97/23/EEC) of 29 May 1997 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States concerning pressure equipment ((OJ L 181, 9.7.1997. )). That Directive will take effect in November 1999. In the meantime the hazard arising from pressure will be covered by the provisions of national law.

Finally, the Commission has asked the European Standardisation Committee (CEN) to prepare a standard dealing with the 'compatibility of medical equipment with oxygen'.

Beyond the safety aspects linked with the design and manufacture of hyperbaric chambers, including the instructions for their use, the Member States should ensure that the competent authorities take the necessary practical action in order to ensure that there are proper conditions of use and that precautions are taken by the persons exposed to the risks, including those concerning clothing and any objects introduced by such persons.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3869/97 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission (5 December 1997)

Subject: Irregularities in the tender procedure for the Italian Ministry for Education

In two previous written questions, P-1972/97 ((OJ C 45, 10.2.1998, p. 132.)) and P-2841/97 ((OJ C 117, 16.4.1998, p. 76.)), the Commission's attention has been drawn to alleged irregularities in the tender procedure for computerization of the Italian Ministry for Education. Given the importance of this tender both as regards its size and the number of Ministry services to be computerized and bearing in mind also that a complaint has been lodged with the Community on this matter:

1. Has the Commission received information from the Italian authorities on possible breaches of Community law with regard to the tender procedure?

2. Does the complaint referred to by the Commission in its reply to the previous question contain new and significant elements that would help to clarify this case and, if so,

3. By whom, and in what capacity, was the complaint in question lodged?

4. Will the Commission provide updated information on the outcome of the inquiry it has launched?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (9 February 1998)

1. The Italian authorities replied to the Commission's request for information on 12 November 1997. They would seem to suggest that the change of ownership of the shares of TSF, which took place at the same time as the tender procedure for computerisation of the Italian Ministry of Education, did not have any effect on the technical capacity of the group of firms to which the contract was awarded. However, further details will be sought from the Italian authorities with a view to shedding full light on the matter.

2. The complaint lodged with the Commission did not contain any particularly significant elements that would help clarify the case.

3. The Commission guarantees confidentiality to any complainant.

4. The Honourable Member will be informed as soon as possible of the results of any further contacts that the Commission has with the Italian authorities with a view to clarifying matters.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-4111/97 by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission (16 January 1998)

Subject: Enforcement of the Habitats Directive

Why is the progress on creating a network of special conservation areas [Nature 2000] so slow when Member States were expected to produce a list of protected areas to be incorporated into this network by June 1995?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (4 February 1998)

The 'Habitats' Directive, Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora ((OJ L 206, 22.7.1992. )), sets June 1995 as the final date for Member States to submit their list of proposed sites for the Natura 2000 network.

It is therefore up to each Member State to explain why it has not met the deadline. The Commission itself has instituted infringement proceedings against the Member States for not submitting complete national lists of sites.

The 'Habitats' Directive provides for a second period of three years during which the Commission must compile a draft list of sites of Community importance from lists submitted by the Member States. The Commission intends meeting this deadline of three years.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3928/97 by Giampaolo D'Andrea (PPE), Pierluigi Castagnetti (PPE), Antonio Graziani (PPE), Gerardo Bianco (PPE) and Maria Colombo Svevo (PPE) to the Commission (12 December 1997)

Subject: Illegal immigration

In recent times there has been a huge increase in the number of illegal immigrants, most of them Kurds, attempting to enter the EU through Italy in what amounts to an exodus from areas in the grip of ethnic conflicts, where, there can be no doubt, human rights are being trampled underfoot.

What action does the European Union intend to take with a view to both stemming the flow and helping to ensure respect for the rights of such ethnic minorities, thus enabling them to lead a life of dignity?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (10 February 1997)

The Conclusions of the Luxembourg European Council referred to the massive influx of immigrants, in particular from Iraq ((Para. 64. )). The Council was requested to prepare and implement an action plan which would also take account of the causes of the influx, of which humanitarian aspects and human rights are an integral part. The plan will outline external relations measures to be taken by the European Union and will also contain a justice and home affairs component, covering in particular the asylum and immigration aspects.

The Commission is actively involved in drawing up the action plan in all the bodies concerned. In 1997 it presented two proposals relating to this matter which are still under study in the Council. In March 1997, it presented a proposal for joint action on the temporary protection of displaced persons, on which Parliament was consulted ((OJ C 106, 4.4.1997. )); this would provide an appropriate legal framework for people in need of temporary international protection. In July 1997, it presented a proposal for a joint action introducing the Odysseus programme of training, exchanges and cooperation in the field of asylum, immigration and crossing of external borders ((OJC 267, 3.9.1997. )), on which Parliament was also consulted, under which targeted measures both between Member States and transit countries can be set up.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-4004/97 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission (14 January 1998)

Subject: Bomb attack against the Oecumenical Patriarchate in Istanbul

On 3 December 1997 a bomb attack took place against the Oecumenical Patriarchate in Istanbul, exploding on the roof of the Chapel of Saint George. It was thrown from the area north of the Patriarchal Gardens, and Turkish officials consider that it came from the minaret of a mosque located directly behind the Patriarchal Residence.

In this bomb attack the deacon of the Oecumenical Patriarchate, Mr Nektarios, was wounded in the shoulder-blade: he was forced to undergo a number of operations in order to remove the shrapnel. It should be noted that, despite repeated attacks against the Oecumenical Patriarchate, security is still insignificant.

Will the Commission say what measures it intends to take to persuade the Turkish authorities finally to provide effective security for the Oecumenical Patriarchate in order to prevent any such incidents occurring in future?

Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (5 February 1998)

The Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) officially condemned in December 1997 the attack on the Orthodox Patriarchate in Istanbul. At that point the MFA emphasised that everything would be done for the culprits to be arrested and brought before the courts, and to avoid any recurrence. Enquiries are still in progress.

On the subject of security measures taken since the attack, information obtained by the Commission from the Oecumenical Patriarchate in Istanbul tells of armed police constantly stationed to protect the Patriarchate, and of continuous patrolling by gendarmes in the approaches to the building. The Patriarchate has said it is satisfied with the steps taken by the Turkish authorities.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3523/97 by Carlos Robles Piquer (PPE) to the Commission (12 November 1997)

Subject: Reforms pending in university research

Nature magazine (Vol. 388, 31 July 1997) has reported that the British Government is drawing up new responses to higher education, where both improved facilities and changes in the attitude of academics are required in order to restore the trust between scientific communities and governments.

The main themes set out in the Dearing report, which can be expected to resurface in a forthcoming White Paper, are not exclusive to the United Kingdom. Guaranteeing the quality and appropriateness of fundamental research, ensuring that similar value is attached in universities to achievements in teaching as well as in research, allowing for sufficient administrative costs in research, modernizing equipment and securing the participation of industry are tasks facing all the governments of the European Union and of other advanced economies.

Can the Commission provide information on reforms and studies similar - to those described above for the United Kingdom - now in progress in Europe, the United States and Japan?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (13 January 1998)

The Commission is active in the Organisation for economic co-operation and development (OECD) group on the science system, which has been investigating precisely this issue for the past two years. Countries which have actively analysed their own university research and development (R& D) system and made their conclusions available to the OECD group include: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Germany, Switzerland, United States, Finland, France, Hungary, Japan, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Sweden.

The issues covered by the report include declining government revenue, the changing nature of public finance, increasing use of industrial R& D funds, economic relevance, systemic linkages, internationalization and personnel issues.

Final contributions to the report are now in the process of being gathered. It is hoped to increase coverage and also to update important issues of changes that were noted by Japan, Germany, Hungary and Finland in the past and current year.

The final version of the report will be available by the end of May 1998, at which time it is expected to have been de-restricted by OECD for circulation.

In addition to the OECD work, a number of activities are about to be launched under the targeted socio-economic research programme of the 4th framework programme for R& D ((COM(92) 459 final. )). A list of main projects is sent directly to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-4089/97 by Peter Truscott (PSE) to the Commission (16 January 1998)

Subject: Funding for Hertfordshire in 1994-1997 from the employment funds ADAPT, HORIZON, YOUTHSTART, NOW and INTEGRA

Would the Commission please inform me of the amount of funding Hertfordshire has received from the employment funds ADAPT, HORIZON, YOUTHSTART, NOW and INTEGRA during the years 1994, 1995, 1996 and 1997?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (4 February 1998)

The amounts (ECU) listed below were paid by the European social fund (ESF) to projects for which the applicant organisations or named contact had a Hertfordshire address:

>TABLE>

The figures for 1995 and 1996 represent the total ESF expenditure in that calendar year. This consists of a first advance payment of up to 50% of the ESF funding allocated, and a second advance of up to 30%, both of which are paid during that year. The balance is then paid out in the following year, after clearance of final claims. The figure for 1997 shows the amount of ESF funding requested by and approved for projects for 1997.

There were no organisations in Hertfordshire receiving funding for Integra (or the strand's predecessor - Horizon disadvantaged). Projects did not receive any funds for 1994, since the first call for projects covered operational activity in the years 1995-1997.