ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0859/96 by Stephen Hughes (PSE) to the Commission (12 April 1996)

Subject: European Commission relations with the European Energy from Waste Coalition (EEWC)

A conference of the European Energy from Waste Coalition (EEWC) was held in Stockholm, Sweden, between 11 and 13 March 1996.

Did the Commission provide any finance for the organization of this conference?

Has the Commission provided any finance to the European Energy from Waste Coalition?

Was there a representative of DG XI at this conference?

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission (7 June 1996)

The Commission is able to confirm for the Honourable Member that in 1995, in the framework of its programme for greater penetration for renewable energy sources (Altener programme), it concluded a shared-cost contract with the European Energy from Waste Coalition to organise a seminar and a visit to a model plant for extracting energy from urban waste for about 30 municipal officers. The seminar and visit took place as planned in Stockholm from 11 to 13 March 1996.

The Commission has neither provided any other finance for this association nor was it officially represented at this event.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0968/96 by Christine Oddy (PSE) to the Commission (26 April 1996)

Subject: Increased veterinary drug bills

Is the Commission aware that new rules on the types of drugs which can be prescribed by veterinary surgeons have doubled the cost of drugs. One example is that of the general antibiotic Kephalexin which costs £14.60 for 100 tablets and has been replaced by a special veterinary version costing £29.37 per 100 tablets.

What moves will the Commission take to review this legislation?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (13 June 1996)

The principal aim of veterinary pharmaceutical legislation is to safeguard the health of both the public and animals, without neglecting the industrial and economic factors which must be considered for this to be achieved. Directive 81/851/EEC, ((OJ L 317, 6.11.1981. )) as amended by Directive 90/676/EEC, ((OJ L 373, 31.12.1990. )) lays down the quality, efficiency and safety criteria that must be taken into account according to the kind of animal being treated. The use of non-authorized medicinal products on animals incurs the risk of undesirable side effects and inefficiency. Furthermore, as far as production animals are concerned, the control of medicinal residues in meat requires the use of veterinary medicinal products whose maximal residual limits are known. This is why this Directive gives preference to veterinary medicines, a principle which the Commission has no intention of eliminating.

This Directive offers the possibility of prescribing human medicines to animals under the 'cascade' principle, i.e. when there is no suitable, authorized medicinal product for a certain animal, the use of an authorized veterinary medicinal product for a different animal and possibly a human medicinal product is acceptable. This 'cascade' idea has introduced a certain flexibility into the previous requirement whereby only veterinary medicinal products could be prescribed.

It is possible that in certain cases, generic medicines for human use are less expensive than new veterinary brands, particularly medicines for human use whose price is directly or indirectly influenced by social security systems. Such differences should, however, become negligible with the development of the veterinary market and free competition.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1605/96 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (24 June 1996)

Subject: Recruitment in DGI-B - Directorate B

What number and proportion of Commission officials working in DGI-B, relations with Latin America, are Spanish or Portuguese?

How is this compatible with the Code of Conduct requirement that there should be no discrimination on the basis of nationality?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission (15 July 1996)

Of the A-grade staff currently employed by Directorate IB/B (Latin America), 3 are Portuguese and 8 are Spanish (there are also 8 Italians).

The procedure for the recruitment of Commission staff is entirely neutral, in line with the staff regulations for officials of the European Communities, Article 7 of which stipulates that 'the appointing authority shall, acting solely in the interest of the service and without regard to nationality, assign each official by appointment or transfer to a post in his category or service which corresponds to his grade'.

However, language skills are obviously an important aspect of the professional requirements for Commission posts, especially in Directorates-General with an external relations brief. Staff of Directorate IB/B are required to have a thorough knowledge of Spanish or Portuguese, the languages in which our cooperation with Latin America is conducted; the same requirements are made with regard to English for staff in the Asia Directorate, and with regard to French for the Mediterranean Directorate.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1302/96 by Ian White (PSE) to the Commission (31 May 1996)

Subject: T1 documents

Regulation 2454/93, Article 346 states 'The goods and the T1 documents shall be presented at the office of destination which shall record details of controls carried out and shall without delay send a copy to the office of departure and retain the other copy'.

Would the Commission be prepared to look at the possibility of possible change which would mean that if the goods and T1 documents had been correctly presented at the office of destination and that office does not comply with the regulation, then any penalty arising shall be levied on the Member States to which the office of destination belongs?

Answer given by Mr Monti On behalf of the Commission (25 July 1996)

The provision referred to by the Honourable Member does indeed require the office of destination in a transit operation to send without delay a copy of the T1 document to the office of departure. As a general rule this must be within ten working days of presentation of the consignment and documents, but may be within one working day of presentation in the case of goods for which a comprehensive guarantee is temporarily prohibited from being used.

Although this time limit may occasionally be exceeded, any Member State which fails to take steps to ensure that this obligation is met by its customs offices may find the Commission or other Member States will institute the procedures provided for by the Treaty to enforce Community law. Under the present Treaty only the Court of Justice of the European Communities is empowered to impose a fine or penalty on a Member State and only if the latter has failed to take the necessary measures to comply with a previous judgment on its failure to meet its obligations.

The Commission has considered the possibility of introducing into secondary legislation a power of direct pecuniary sanction of Member States which do not meet their obligations in order to ensure the proper transposition and implementation of directives relating to the completion of the single market. Because of the direct applicability of legislation and a division of responsibilities between the Commission and Member States in the customs field a partnership approach has been taken to the management of the customs union and protection of the Community's external border. This approach may eventually be reviewed if it is not successful in ensuring the proper functioning of the customs union.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1290/96 by Antoni Gutiérrez Díaz (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (31 May 1996)

Subject: Merger of the Crown Cork & Seal and Carnaudmetalbox food and drink canning groups

On 6 November 1995, the Advisory Committee on Concentrations delivered its opinion on this merger ((OJ C 86, 23.3.1996, p. 3.)), and on 14 November 1996 the Commission deemed the operation compatible with the single market and the EEE Agreement (Decision 96/222/EC ((OJ L 75, 23.3.1996, p. 38.))).

The Commission's decision leads me to ask:

1. Can the Commission tell me who decided, and why, that the new company should 'relinquish control' of five aerosol factories (connected with neither food nor drink), namely the Carnaudmetalbox, Lyon, Reus and Schwedt factories and the Crown factories in the UK and Italy?

2. What industrial and R& D productivity plans exist? What effects will they have in terms of direct (or derived) employment and in how many plants?

3. What effect will the concentration of purchasing power have on supplies of European materials? Will such supplies be procured exclusively from within Europe?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission (3 July 1996)

1. In its investigation of the proposed merger between Crown Cork and Seal and Carnaud Metalbox the Commission found that the operation, as originally notified, would lead to the creation of a dominant position in the European market for tinplate aerosol cans. For the reasons of this finding, the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its Decision 96/222/EC in this case ((OJ L 75, 23.3.1996. )). To remove this concern, Crown Cork and Seal decided to offer the divestiture of five aerosol plants. The offer specified the plants to be divested. The Commission considered this offer to be sufficient to remove its competitive concerns. It therefore declared the concentration compatible with the common market.

2. The plants have not yet been divested. Therefore, the plans of any new owner regarding productivity or employment are unknown at this moment.

3. The Commission examined intensively in its investigation the future impact of this merger on supplies of materials, especially tinplate. It found that the operation will not lead to the creation of buying power. It noted especially that the current market situation in the United States will not allow the parties to use United States prices as an additional leverage against European suppliers for two reasons. First, an economic survey ordered by the Commission showed that the price difference between the United States and Europe is not big enough to create an economic incentive to ship substantial amounts of tin mill products across the Atlantic. Second, it found that the United States tin mills have not enough reserve capacity to serve non-American customers on a large scale. In the light of these findings, no significant change in the patterns and origins of supply is to be expected in the future.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1021/96 by Doeke Eisma (ELDR) and Hugh Kerr (PSE) to the Commission (3 May 1996)

Subject: Misuse of EU funding by the European Bureau for Conservation and Development (EBCD)

On 10 January 1996, the Commission stated, in answer to our Question E-3162/95 ((OJ C 91, 27.3.1996, p. 38. )) concerning the misuse of EU funding by the EBCD, that the evaluation of the financial report relating to the identification of Community-based wild resource management projects in South-East Asia implemented by the EBCD would be sent to us in due time.

Is the Commission still examining the financial report mentioned above or has it finished its evaluation?

If so, could it send us the results of this evaluation?

Answer given by Mr Marin on behalf of the Commission (5 July 1996)

The Commission has completed its examination of the EBCD contract relating to the 'Sustainable use of wildlife; phase one - identification of demonstration projects in South Asia' - and concluded that there has not been a misuse of Community funds. The investigations did reveal internal disagreements within EBCD which may have led to the concerns on the misuse of project funds.

Examination of the financial aspects of the project in question has shown minor errors as well as some expenditure after the end of the contract involving limited sums.

In the absence of fresh information, no fraud can be imputed. The Commission is taking the customary steps to recover the excess sums paid in order to safeguard the financial interests of the Community.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1526/96 by Elisabeth Schroedter (V) to the Commission (6 June 1996)

Subject: Compensatory investment allowance payments by the government of the Land of Brandenburg for the preferential use of brown coal as an energy source

Is the Commission aware that the government of the Land of Brandenburg is offering all public utilities in Brandenburg an investment allowance (about one third of the total investment) to cover all the additional cost of constructing new combined heat-and-power plants using the expensive variant of a technology based on brown coal rather than a power station variant using natural gas?

Is the Commission aware that this investment allowance is conditional on the purchase of a specified annual quantity of brown coal from the local Lausitz open-cast brown coal mining industry?

Is the Commission aware that the government of the Land of Brandenburg similarly intends to grant the public utilities of the city of Cottbus an investment allowance if, when investing in a new power station, they decide against the combined heat-and-power technology, with its very high level of efficiency, and instead buy district heat from the central Jänschwalde brown coal plant?

Is the Commission aware that in the agreement settling the dispute before the Federal Constitutional Court the city of Brandenburg an der Havel, one of the plaintiffs, was required to ensure sufficient generation of electricity using brown coal and to limit its own generation of electricity?

If so, can the Commission explain why this does not contravene the rules on competition contained in the Treaty (Articles 85, 86 and 91)?

If not, will the Commission initiate measures based on the rules on competition in the EC Treaty to combat this practice in the Land of Brandenburg?

Can the Commission say what measures it will initiate?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission (5 July 1996)

As a result of Written Question No P-850/96, ((OJ C 280, 25.9.1996, p.91. )) the Commission's attention was drawn to possible measures to promote the use of eastern German brown coal under agreements concluded as part of the 'energy consensus rounds' concerning eastern Germany and it has requested the German authorities to provide relevant information. However, it is not aware of the fact that the Government of the Land of Brandenburg has granted or is planning to grant massive investment allowances to public utilities in Brandenburg and to the city of Cottbus with a view to encouraging the use of brown coal as a source of energy.

Consequently, the Commission will be asking the German authorities forthwith to give their views on this matter too, so that the measures can be assessed in the light of Articles 92 and 93 of the EC Treaty. In order to ascertain whether the agreement settling the dispute before the Federal Constitutional Court constitutes an infringement of Article 85, 86 or 90, the Commission needs to know the exact details of the settlement and the identity of the parties concerned. It will be seeking further information from the German authorities.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1412/96 by Erhard Meier (PSE) to the Commission (6 June 1996)

Subject: Transposition of EU Directives by Austria

There are several reports that Austria is transposing EU Directives slowly.

1. What percentage of EU Directives has Austria not yet transposed?

2. Can the European Union tell whether Austria's delay in transposing EU Directives is due to tardiness by

a. the Federation (Federal Republic of Austria) or

b. the Austrian Länder?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (10 July 1996)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its 13th annual report to Parliament on monitoring the application of Community law (1995) ((COM(96) 600 final. )) and in particular to the introduction and annex IV. The introduction to the report includes a table giving the number of national transposition measures which have been notified by each Member State for the transposal of directives applicable on 31 December 1995 and each Member State's notification rate. Annex IV shows the notification situation for national transposition measures with regard to each directive in force on that date.

In Austria the federal authorities are responsible for ensuring that Community law obligations are complied with. There are nonetheless areas where full transposal requires the involvement of the Länder.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0635/96 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission (15 March 1996)

Subject: Unorthodox early retirement measures

An article which appeared in the Belgian newspaper Het Nieuwblad on 28 February 1996 claimed that a senior Commission official, arrested following the investigations into the Agusta affair involving secret financing of the Flemish Socialist Party, was now on indefinite sick leave.

Can the Commission explain the reasons behind this curious and unorthodox measure?

Can it also confirm whether the senior official in question has been subject to the procedure provided for in the Staff Regulations of the Community institutions with a view to ascertaining his responsibilities in the case in point and determining whether his behaviour has been in conformity with the provisions of Article 12 (Title II) of the Staff Regulations?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (13 May 1996)

The former official in question is no longer in service at the Commission, having been retired and granted an invalidity pension in accordance with the relevant procedures in the Staff Regulations of Officials of the Communities, following a meeting of the medical committee which pronounced invalidity. It should be noted that, in setting up this committee, the Commission ensured maximum objectiveness by appointing an eminent Scottish specialist who, with the doctor designated by the former official, by common agreement designated a German university professor as the third doctor necessary to complete the Invalidity Committee. Under the Staff Regulations, the opinion delivered by the said committee binds the appointing authority of the Commission which does not have any discretionary power in the matter.

This former official was mentioned in the Belgian press in connection with court proceedings started by the Belgian authorities, which are still at the investigation stage. The Commission would remind the Honourable Member that the Staff Regulations provide that where an allegation of serious misconduct is made against an official for failure to carry out his official duties or for a breach of law, the appointing authority may suspend the official after initiating disciplinary proceedings. However, under the disciplinary measures, a final decision on the situation of the official can only be taken when the national courts have given a final verdict.

All these provisions were applied in the case in question.

The appointing authority took the decision to initiate disciplinary action against the official in question and to suspend that action as soon as it was informed of the measures taken in the criminal proceedings. The disciplinary action was indeed suspended and the situation of the official can only be settled after the court hearing the case has reached a final verdict in accordance with the last paragraph of Article 88 of the Staff Regulations.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1351/96 by Jean-Yves Le Gallou (NI) to the Commission (3 June 1996)

Subject: Community subsidies to associations, NGOs and various bodies

Can the Commission provide a full list of associations, NGOs and bodies receiving Community subsidies under budget heading B7-420 (Community operations connected with the Israel/PLO peace agreement)? Can it state the exact total of these subsidies at the close of the last financial year?

Answer given by Mr Marin on behalf of the Commission (11 July 1996)

The Commission is forwarding direct to the Honourable Member and to the General Secretariat of the Parliament a table detailing commitments made on budget Article B7-420 since the inception of that budget line in 1987 up to the end of 1995. It includes all projects with any non-governmental organization (NGO) or other organization other than the Palestinian Authority (PA). The list is broken down sector by sector for ease of reference.

Various organizations on the list (the Palestinian Housing Council (PHC), the Palestinian Energy Centre (PEC), and the Council for Higher Education (CHE)), were in existence before the establishment of the PA, even if lately they have been operating under the ultimate authority of the PA. Projects with these organizations have been included for the sake of completeness.

Finally, it should be noted that the operation for the preparation of Palestinian elections drew also from budget Article B7-702. The Parliament should therefore be aware that those projects regarding elections detailed in this list (mostly undertaken with the Palestinian Commission for Local Government and Elections) give only an incomplete picture of the whole election operation. Complete information on the technical preparation of Palestinian elections is naturally available from the Commission.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1714/96 by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission (25 June 1996)

Subject: Evaluation of projects approved under the Eurathlon programme

What methods did the Commission employ to ensure that the gender dimension and the need to provide sporting opportunities for disabled people and ethnic minorities were not overlooked when establishing the list of 175 projects under the Eurathlon programme? What percentage of the 175 projects are specifically aimed at women, disabled people and ethnic minorities?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (22 July 1996)

The Commission is glad to inform the Honourable Member that in fact two programmes in the sporting area exist, Eurathlon and the sport programme for people with disabilities.

In the framework of Eurathlon, projects are considered by an independent jury (national level and Community level) which advises the Commission. The Commission then takes a decision as to which projects should receive financial support. A national preselection committee comprising officials from the ministries of sport and non-governmental organizations represented on the European sports forum and chaired by a representative of the Commission has been set up in each Member State. Projects are assessed by the national committees, which submit recommendations to the European committee. This year 175 projects were selected. The Commission is sending direct to the Honourable Member and to the Parliament's Secretariat copy of the press release and the list of the 175 selected projects in 1996.

Applications in the framework of the programme 'Sport for people with disabilities' are dealt with in a different way. Applications should be submitted to the national committee on sports for people with disabilities by the first of September of the year prior to that in which the project will take place, with a copy to the Commission. The European committee then recommends projects for funding.

In the context of Eurathlon 1996, 120 projects will cover sport for young people (men and women). 23 projects are specifically focused on women. Although attention was paid during the selection process to the objectives of the Eurathlon programme in general, there was no specific category for ethnic minorities only.