ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0860/96 by Stephen Hughes (PSE) to the Commission (12 April 1996)

Subject: Unlawful practices when building workers are employed in another Member State

Further to its reply to Written Question E-2389/95 ((OJ C 300, 13.11.1995, p. 57. )), could the Commission forward a copy of its findings, presented at the symposium organized by the Greek authorities on 12 and 13 October 1995, to the Secretariat of Parliament and to me?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (15 May 1996)

The Commission is directly forwarding a copy of the study on the application of the provisions of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 ((OJ L 149, 5.7.1971; consolidated version in OJ C 325, 10.12.1992. )) in the field of postings and utilisation of form E 101 to the Honourable Member and the Secretariat General of the Parliament.

The Commission will also request the Greek organisers of the conference of 12 and 13 October 1995 to send a copy of the proceedings of this colloqium to the same addressees.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0579/96 by David Hallam (PSE) to the Commission (11 March 1996)

Subject: EC legislation on protected designations of origin

Should the current legislation on protected designations of origin apply to the production of Worcestershire sauce produced inside and outside the county of Worcestershire in the United Kingdom?

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

Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs ((OJ L 208, 24.7.1992. )) does not actually apply to sauces, which are neither agricultural products nor among the foodstuffs listed in Annex I to the Regulation. The designation 'Worcestershire sauce' could not, therefore, be protected under this Regulation.

It could, on the other hand, be covered by Regulation (EEC) No 2082/92 on certificates of specific character for agricultural products and foodstuffs, one aim of which is to protect traditional recipes. The list of foodstuffs annexed to this Regulation specifically includes 'prepared condiment sauces'. So far, however, the Commission has not received any request for registration of the designation 'Worcestershire sauce'.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0312/96 by Irini Lambraki (PSE) to the Council (27 February 1996)

Subject: Revision of the third pillar provisions at the Intergovernmental Conference

The Council document entitled 'Draft revision of the Treaties establishing the European Union' states that in accordance with the objectives set out in Articles A and B of the EU Treaty, the Intergovernmental Conference will examine those provisions for which revision is provided pursuant to Article N(2) of the Treaty.

Given that the provisions on cooperation in the fields of justice and home affairs do not provide for their revision by the Intergovernmental Conference, will the Council, taking a broad interpretation of Article N(2), include the third pillar provisions among the provisions to be revised?

Does the Council not think that there is a need for this in terms of the general objectives of the revision which calls for the adaptation of the Treaty to satisfy present and future requirements and to bring Europe closer to its citizens?

Reply (13 June 1996)

As the Honourable Member points out, nowhere in the TEU is explicit provision in fact made for revision of Title VI at the IGC.

Since it drew up its report on the functioning of the Treaty on European Union ((Drawn up in accordance with the conclusions of the European Council in Corfu as a contribution to the Reflection Group preparing for the 1996 Intergovernmental Conference. )) in April 1995, the Council has established that the area opened up by Article N(2) of the TEU needs to be supplemented in the light of certain other provisions, in particular the Corfu European Council's conclusions that it was important to 'examine and elaborate ideas relating to the provisions of the TEU for which revision is foreseen and other possible improvements in a spirit of democracy and openness...'.

Moreover, the Cannes European Council included among the priorities to be examined with a view to the Intergovernmental Conference the question of providing a better response to modern demands as regards internal security, and the fields of justice and home affairs more generally.

In addition, the conclusions of the European Council meeting in Madrid in December 1995 state that the Intergovernmental Conference will, in general, have to examine the improvements which will have to be made to the Treaties to bring the Union into line with today's realities and tomorrow's requirements, in the light of the outcome of the Reflection Group's proceedings. Those proceedings ((Described in the Reflection Group's report to the Madrid European Council. )) gave particular prominence to an analysis of the provisions currently in force on cooperation in the area of justice and home affairs, and their limits, and emphasized in particular the need to creat a Europe more in harmony with the expectations of its citizens.

Finally, the Turin European Council called upon the IGC to produce adequate results on several issues concerning justice and home affairs.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0866/96 by Miguel Arias Cañete (PPE) to the Commission (12 April 1996)

Subject: EU wine imports

During the current marketing year, Spanish winegrowers have immobilized something over one million hectolitres of wine under the private storage arrangements in addition to 400 000 hectolitres of grape must, 15 000 hectolitres of concentrated must and 11 000 hectolitres of rectified concentrated must. These figures clearly show that the Spanish market is stagnant, despite the fact that the Spanish grape harvest was exceptionally short on account of drought and frost.

This state of affairs is due to the massive increase in imports of wines from non-member countries, in particular Argentina.

Could the Commission therefore say whether or not it is in a position to guarantee that such imports are in accordance with minimum quality and alcoholic content standards and that they are cleared through customs under the correct tariff headings?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (29 April 1996)

While the figures quoted by the Honourable Member for storage arrangements in Spain during the current market year are correct, the Commission would point out that they are 50% below the level prevailing in the years immediately following accession (2 million hectolitres). The storage contracts were in any case concluded in December and January, at a time when prices in Spain were particularly high, which suggests that operators were not electing to place goods in storage because of market considerations alone.

The Commission is aware of press rumours about irregularities affecting imports, but would point out that the clearance of imports is the responsibility of the Member States. It has repeatedly reminded Member States' delegations on the Management Committee for Wine how important it is for the competent supervisory bodies to keep a strict check on imports.

Though the Commission has not yet received any official complaint it is carrying out a pre-emptive investigation, the results of which should shortly be to hand.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0615/96 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (13 March 1996)

Subject: Groundhandling at airports

In the proposal for a Council Directive on access to the groundhandling market at Community airports (COM(94)0590) ((OJ C 142, 8.6.1995, p. 7. )), the Commission seeks to:

- define Community rules that will enable the general principles contained in the Treaty to be applied effectively to the groundhandling market;

- introduce measures to accompany liberalization of air transport and related activities;

- establish transparency of costs by unbundling accounting and financial aspects of groundhandling activities and prohibiting any financing which might give rise to a distortion of competition.

Will the Commission establish a technical distinction between operations intended for aircraft and operations not intended for aircraft, by drawing up an exhaustive list of the individual activities?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission (30 April 1996)

The proposal for a Council directive on access to the groundhandling market at Community airports includes an annex which lists the different categories of groundhandling services. As indicated in the explanatory memorandum, this list takes up and refers to the nomenclature established by the International Air Transport Association (IATA) which is used by airlines and gives technical definitions of the operations covered by each category of service. The list permits the reader to distinguish those categories of service related to aircraft from those concerning other matters.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0824/96 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (12 April 1996)

Subject: Construction of a sewage treatment plant on Samos

The construction of a sewage treatment plant in the commune of Pagondhas, Samos, was included in a joint Interior Ministry-North Aegean Region programme. The commune subsequently commissioned, and funded, a project study and an environmental impact assessment. It should be pointed out that the sewage treatment project will benefit the region in many ways; not only will sanitary conditions be improved, the tourist industry and the economy will also gain (it will be possible to develop a longer stretch of the Heraion coast).

The North Aegean Region recently decided to allocate the appropriations earmarked for sewage treatment to other projects, probably road-building, so that all that remains of this essential sewage treatment project is the expenditure on the studies. Bearing in mind that such a decision defies both common sense and all scientific analysis (developmental, economic, environmental), that pollution hits the tourist industry and numerous professions which depend directly on tourism and the sea, that money has already been spent on the studies and that the hopes of the region's population have been raised, can the Commission confirm that the above is actually true? If so, what objective criteria were used to reallocate the appropriations, and what will the Commission do to support and implement the first investment project, which is recognized as a major priority as far as the tourist industry and the environment is concerned and which is closely bound up with the health of the region's inhabitants?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (24 May 1996)

The Commission is not aware of these projects which are apparently financed under the national budget. It is of course up to the Greek authorities to decide on the priority of the projects they finance in their regions.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0250/96 by Undine-Uta Bloch von Blottnitz (V) to the Commission (9 February 1996)

Subject: Habitats directive

The Commission has announced that it would impose fines on Member States failing to transpose the habitats directive (92/43/EEC ((OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7. ))) by the due date or in full.

1. What is the status of transposition of this directive in the Community?

2. Which countries have not yet transposed the directive, or not transposed it in full?

3. Have fines already been imposed? Does the Commission have any plans to impose such fines? If so, on which Member States?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (21 March 1996)

Implementation of this Directive has at least two key aspects. In formal terms, Member States should have adopted and communicated to the Commission national implementing legislation by June 1994. In addition, Member States should have prepared and communicated to the Commission by June 1995 a national list of sites proposed for inclusion in the ecological network Natura 2000 together with information on each site.

As of 16 February 1996, five Member States had failed to send to the Commission any national implementing legislation (Germany, Greece, Spain, Italy, and Portugal). The Commission has started legal proceedings for this failure.

The legislation sent by other Member States is being checked for conformity with the Directive. The Commission does not rule out the possibility of legal action against some of these for inadequate legislation.

As of 16 February 1996, eight Member States had failed to send to the Commission any national list of proposed Natura 2000 sites (Belgium, Germany, Greece, Spain, France, Ireland, Luxembourg, Netherlands). Portugal sent a list only in respect of the islands of Madeira and the Azores. The Commission is actively pursuing this failure with the Member States concerned. It is also urging the Member States which have sent incomplete lists or incomplete site information to conclude the necessary work as soon as possible.

The Commission has no power to impose fines on Member States. Only the Court of Justice can do this, as part of a second condemnatory judgement. The Commission will if necessary ask the Court to impose fines on Member States which do not comply with the Directive.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1236/96 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (23 May 1996)

Subject: Misappropriation of Structural Funds

I understand that, with the aid of Community incentives, Kraft Jacobs Suchard Italy of Zingonia, in the province of Bergamo, has planned and carried out investments in Spain, thus ending its activities in the Bergamo area and leaving serious unemployment problems.

Would the Commission confirm whether my information about the incentives obtained by Kraft Jacobs is correct and whether such use of these incentives is lawful, or clearly contrary to the spirit of the Structural Funds and the principles set out in the White Paper on 'Growth, competitiveness and employment'?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (1 July 1996)

The Commission has asked the Member State concerned for information regarding the facts raised to by the Honourable Member. It will inform him of its findings.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0585/96 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (11 March 1996)

Subject: The catacombs of Milos

The catacombs of Milos, the only Christian graveyard of its kind in Greece and a priceless part of our common European historical and cultural heritage, are at risk from soil erosion, and protective measures are needed if they are to be saved. This monument has been dated at between the second and fifth centuries AD and consists of a complex of three caves that were initially independent but were later united, creating three chambers and six passageways.

Since Article 128 of the Treaty on European Union gives particular prominence to the need for the conservation and safeguarding of cultural heritage of European significance, and bearing in mind the action of the European Union in the cultural sphere - despite its subsidiary character - and the leading role played by Greece in this field, will the Commission say how it intends to respond to this request by the relevant Greek authorities that the project to preserve the catacombs of Milos be integrated, and funded under, a Community programme, and whether it might also grant technical aid to conserve this monument, if necessary?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (6 May 1996)

The Commission agrees that protection should be given to historical monuments in the Community and that monuments like the catacombs of Milos in Greece, which could become tourist attractions for Community citizens living far away, have a special importance in the development of the regions they are in.

However, it is up to the Greek authorities to put forward any relevant measures, under either the multifund operational programme for the southern Aegean 1994-99 or the pilot programme for the preservation of cultural heritage, particularly archaeological sites, announced in the Official Journal. ((OJ C 67, 5.3.1996. ))

Were a request to be made, the Commission could look into possible joint financing.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0897/96 by Ernesto Caccavale (UPE) to the Commission (11 April 1996)

Subject: Situation of commercially-grown tomatoes

Since the 1985-86 marketing year (with the exception of the 1992-93 marketing year when the threshold arrangements were in force) the tomato sector has been regulated by a system of national quotas subdivided into three parts allocated to the various industries on the basis of the quantity processed in the three previous marketing years.

This system, which has had the merit of preventing the production surpluses recorded in the mid-80s, has, however, removed all bargaining power from producers' associations which, in order to sell their produce, are obliged to assign it to the quota-holding industries, even in cases where the latter have a disruptive effect on the sector.

Does the Commission not think that a reform of the rules on tomato processing is now long-overdue, at least as regards three important aspects of Community law:

1. transfer of the quotas to the actual producers;

2. increase in the Community quota from 65 million quintals to 75 million, in view of the accession of new countries to the Union and the gradual increase in consumption;

3. a review of the three industries (fresh tomatoes, peeled tomatoes and tomato concentrate) to which quotas are currently allocated?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (26 April 1996)

With regard to processed tomatoes, the Commission's proposal for the reform of the common organization of the market in processed fruit and vegetable products ((OJ C 52, 21.2.1996. )) provides for the following.

1. Production quotas and production aid will be administered by the processing industries, as at present. Alternative systems involving the transfer of quotas to producers (who are many and widely scattered) would be unmanageable and therefore inefficient.

2. The quota will be held at its present level. The enlargement of the Community provides no grounds for increasing the Community quota beyond the present figure of one million tonnes, since the new Member States already obtain the bulk of their supplies on the Community market.

3. The three product groups will continue to be: tomato concentrate, whole peeled tomatoes and other tomato products. Abolishing the third group would penalize peeled tomato processing industries which manufacture other products from peeled tomatoes.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1235/96 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. EU funding for north-west Italy



Official Journal C 280 , 25/09/1996 P. 0121



WRITTEN QUESTION E-1235/96 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (23 May 1996) Subject: EU funding for north-west Italy In 1995, what sums and for what measures did the EU grant financial support to the Italian regions of Lombardia, Piemonte, Liguria and Valle d'Aosta from the following funds/programmes? 1. European Regional Development Fund (ERDF); 2. European Agricultural Guarantee and Guidance Fund (EAGGF) - guidance section; 3. European Agricultural Guarantee and Guidance Fund (EAGGF) - guarantee section; 4. European Social Fund (ESF); 5. European Community research programmes; 6. European Community environmental programmes; 7. other European Community programmes. Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (18 June 1996) The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1104/96 by Stylianos Panagopoulos (PSE) to the Commission (13 May 1996)

Subject: Terrorist attack on Greek tourists in Cairo

The terrorist attack on the Hotel Europa in Cairo on the morning of 18 April 1996, which resulted in the death of 18 Greek nationals and the wounding of 14 others, has again focused attention on the safety of tourists from the European Union travelling to third countries. Once more over the Easter period, mankind mourns the unjust death of innocent people who fall victims to perverse fanaticism.

1. What is the Commission's response to such acts of terrorism?

2. What measures will it take to protect European Union citizens who travel to third countries as tourists?

Answer given by Mr Marin on behalf of the Commission (30 May 1996)

The presidency of the Union issued a declaration on 22 April 1996 condemning the terrorist attack against Greek tourists, expressing its deepest condolences to the families of the victims, and confirming the determination of the Union to confront terrorism decisively in all its forms.

This latest shocking terrorist act is not only distressing due to the high number of human lives which have been lost but also due to the negative consequences that it may have for the Egyptian economy, in particular tourism, which seemed to be recovering after a period of relative calm.

The presidency of the Union wrote to the Greek foreign minister on 18 April 1996 expressing its sincere sympathy and moral support. The Union will continue with its efforts to reactivate the Middle East peace process and to boost regional development in the Middle East and Egypt.

The Sharm Al-Sheikh summit of peacemakers of 13 March 1996, was organised against the background of the latest wave of attacks against Israelis. Both at the summit and during the subsequent meetings that have taken place gathering all twenty nine participants, the Union and the Commission have further reaffirmed their commitment to fight all acts of terrorism, whatever their motives and whoever the perpetrators, and to increase their co-ordination in this respect.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0791/96 by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission (3 April 1996)

Subject: Delays to phasing out VOCs in UK

Is the Commission aware that the UK Government has postponed a series of deadlines for phasing out VOCs by the printing, leather, paint, paper, rubber, film and textile and fabric industries and does the Commission believe this will harm the UK's ability to meet the deadline laid down in the EU directive to cut VOC emissions by 30 per cent by 1999?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (7 May 1996)

The Commission is aware that the United Kingdom government has postponed certain deadlines for the phasing out of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by the printing, leather, paint, paper, rubber, film and textile and fabric industries. For the industries in question, the Commission has made a commitment in the 1996 work programme to bring forward a directive controlling emissions from these installations. This directive will go further than the Economic commission for Europe of the United Nations (UNECE) protocol and will set the targets which the Commission considers should be met from this sector.

The question of compliance with the obligations of the UNECE protocol, which cover the totality of man-made VOC emissions, is in the first instance an obligation under international law of the ratifying country. The United Kingdom has stated that its action will not affect its ability to meet its obligations under the UNECE protocol.