ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0134/97 by Abdelkader Mohamed Ali (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (3 February 1997)

Subject: Racism and xenophobia in university textbooks in Spain

The row over publication of a book by a professor of psychology at Complutense University, Madrid (Spain) with racist, sexist and xenophobic features has sparked off a debate on academic freedom and respect for basic human rights.

Since academic freedom should not violate such principles and rights, and the authority vested in university teaching staff should help to safeguard them, does not the Commission agree that there is a need to lay down a code of ethical conduct with which teachers should be required to comply, to prevent similar cases from happening in future?

What action does the Commission propose to take to reconcile the right of academic freedom with respect for human rights?

As 1997 has been declared European Year Against Racism and Xenophobia, and as occurrences of this kind are on the increase, what representations will the Commission be making to the authorities of the Member States to ensure that all social groups are respected and encourage the creation of an egalitarian and mutually supportive society?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (25 March 1997)

The Commission is aware of the discussion following the publication of the book in question and strongly condemns incitement to racial hatred, especially when such a message originates from figures of authority. However, action against such events is the responsibility of the Member States.

The 1997 European year against racism aims to raise awareness and disseminate good practice and information on the struggle against racism, xenophobia and anti-semitism. The Commission endeavours to do so in close partnership with the Member States and other key players in society. Schools, universities and young people are therefore important participants in the year.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0958/97 by Gianni Tamino (V) to the Commission (13 March 1997)

Subject: Project for the detection and evaluation of aneugenic chemicals

In June 1993, the ENEA notified the relevant authorities, in accordance with the Italian legislation on animal experiments, that it was conducting experiments on 330 mice, over a one-year period and with Community funding, at the Casaccia-Roma CRE, in conjunction with the Istituto Superiore di Sanitá (health institute), to assess nondisjunction of chromosomes in the male and female germ cells of mice caused by chemical substances.

Is the Commission aware of these experiments? How much financial assistance was provided and what innovative results were obtained? Is the Commission aware that the experiments were conducted without using anaesthetics, without applying for permission not to use them as required by Italian law and without the laboratory having received the necessary authorization - on the date of the notification - from the Italian Ministry of Health? Has the funding granted to this laboratory been renewed?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0957/97 and E-0958/97 given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (24 April 1997)

The research to which the questions refer was undertaken in the framework of two shared-cost action Research & development (R& D) contracts Science and technology for environmental protection (STEP-CT910144 and STEP-CT910159). In the first of these, the Community contribution to European nuclear energy agency (ENEA) was ECU 117 000, representing 20% of the total costs of the work. In the second, the work was subcontracted to ENEA by the Italian Centro Nazionale di Ricerca which received ECU 44 000 from the Commission, representing 50% of the costs of its work. The Commission is aware of the work undertaken in both projects the

results of which have been published in the peer-reviewed scientific literature. Final synthesis reports were published in a special issue of the journal Mutation research in 1996 (volume 353, pages 65-84 and 11-46 respectively). No tests which required anaesthesia were conducted in the projects. The Commission has also been assured that the facility at Casaccia has been in operation since the early 1960's with a long tradition of implementation of the most advanced conditions for animal health and care.

The results of both projects contributed directly to the goals of the STEP research programme and indirectly to Commission policy on chemicals safety and assessment, in that they helped develop improved methodologies for chemicals safety assessment, leading to a better protection of man and the environment.

Both of the 36 month contracts started on 1 October 1991, four months before the Italian legislation (27 January 1992). The law and its procedures were clarified by the Italian government in a series of circulars during 1992-1994. During this period, the authorities were notified of the research and according to the law, the experiments were thenceforth permitted. The contracts terminated on 30 September 1994 and have not been renewed.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0936/97 by Raimo Ilaskivi (PPE) to the Commission (13 March 1997)

Subject: Banning discrimination on the grounds of age in the Member States

Finland has gone over to a system whereby index-linked increase in the pensions of the over-65s is lower than that for the under-65s. This means a clear increase in economic inequality based solely on age. In other words this is a blatant case of discrimination on the grounds of age., which is in clear conflict with wider efforts to achieve equality among citizens. It is after all regarded as self-evident that people must not be placed on an unequal footing on the grounds of their race, skin colour, religion, sex, etc.

What action does the Commission propose to take - e.g. by means of a directive or other similar decision - to ensure that discrimination on the grounds of age is banned as soon as possible in the Member States and that the decision concerning pensioners in Finland is declared null and void?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (14 April 1997)

The powers of the Community in the area of social protection remain fairly limited. The only binding rules are the coordination Regulations on social security for migrant workers (Regulations 1408/71 ((OJ L 149, 5.7.1971. )) and 574/72 ((OJ L 74, 27.3.1972. ))) and the Directives on equal treatment for men and women (Directive 79/7/EEC ((OJ L 6, 10.1.1979. )) on statutory schemes and Directives 86/378/EEC ((OJ L 225, 12.8.1986. )) and 96/97/EEC ((OJ L 46, 17.2.1997. )) on occupational schemes).

The organisation and operation of social protection schemes, and especially the settlement of pension rights and the rate applicable to the various categories of workers, are matters for the Member States, provided that the above-mentioned Community rules are observed.

In the case outlined by the Honourable Member, these rules are not concerned, and consequently the Commission cannot make representations to the Finnish authorities.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0511/97 by Jannis Sakellariou (PSE) to the Council (19 February 1997)

Subject: Elections in Pakistan

1. Can the Council confirm that the elections in Pakistan on 3 February 1997 were conducted in accordance with democratic principles and were general, equal and free?

2. Was participation by all parties, including for example the Mohajir Quami Movement (MQM), ensured, and if not, why not?

Answer (16 May 1997)

In the report of the European Union Election Observer Group on the National and Provincial Assembly Elections held in Pakistan on 3 February 1997, the following conclusions are drawn:

1. The European Union Observer group, which was formed only in the last few days of the election campaign, was able to visit only a small percentage of the polling stations. The group concluded on the basis of their observations that, in general, the poll was conducted in accordance with the rules and in an equitable manner, and that the results reflected the wishes of those who voted. However serious deficiencies, in the electoral register and the identification of voters, excluded a significant proportion of those who had the right to vote. The shortcomings observed, and the serious incidents reported in a small proportion of voting stations, did not in the view of the observer group alter the final outcome. They should, however, be object of follow-up action by the Electoral Commission. The observer group believe that, on the whole, voters were properly served by the election officials. Overall, the Election Commission, their polling station officials, the parties, the security forces and the voters contributed to a calm atmosphere and an orderly election.

2. Voting was conducted, in general, in a calm atmosphere. There were some serious exceptions witnessed by observers in Baluchistan Province and reported in Karachi. Overall voting procedures were orderly, with voting officials making brave efforts to ensure transparent voting procedures in frequently difficult conditions in terms of space and/or facilities available.

In Karachi, the observer terms received credible reports of serious instances of intimidation, and the possible collusion of the security forces in them. These instances appear to be targeted at preventing MQM(A) party agents from being present in certain polling stations, and discouraging MQM(A) supporters from casting their votes. The observer group believe that the authorities should carry out a thorough investigation.

The Council instances will raise these issues in their institutionalised contacts with the Pakistani Government.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0825/97 by Jean-Yves Le Gallou (NI) to the Commission (10 March 1997)

Subject: Community subsidies to associations, NGOs and various other bodies

With regard to heading B7-7040 (Subsidies for certain activities of organizations pursuing human rights objectives), can the Commission provide a complete list of associations, NGOs and other bodies benefiting from Community subsidies and the exact amount of these subsidies for the last completed budgetary year, i.e. 1996?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0825/97 and E-0826/97 given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (11 April 1997)

The Commission aims to ensure the greatest possible openness in the use made of the Community budget, and especially of those financial instruments directly linked to human rights.

For headings B7-7040 and B7-7070, specific information is always given at the end of the financial year, when the President of Parliament and Chairman of the relevant committee are sent a report with a breakdown of how monies have been spent, a complete list of the associations, NGOs and other bodies which have received grants, and the exact amount of these grants.

The details requested by the Honourable Member will be sent as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0302/97 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (13 February 1997)

Subject: Structural Funds

The Court of Auditors' annual report for the financial year 1995 ((OJ C 340, 12.11.1996. )) stressed that the criteria taken into account for determining the regions and areas eligible for Objective 1, 2 and 5b and for Community initiatives mean that more than 50% of the Community population is affected by one or other objective.

As a consequence, Community aid measures are to a certain extent spread over a large number of eligible areas. The percentage of the Community population concerned by Objective 1 has risen from 21.7% to 26.6%. For Objective 2 regions, this percentage is 16.8, whereas the limit set by the framework regulation is 15%.

What does the Commission intend to do about the fact that coordination between loans and subsidies under the Structural Funds is far from satisfactory?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (20 March 1997)

The areas eligible under the Structural Funds do indeed cover slightly more than half the population of the Community. This reflects an extension of the eligible areas compared with the 1989-93 programming period. It is the result of an appreciably enlarged list of less-developed areas eligible for Objective 1, due in particular to German unification, and of the poor performance of the economy when the lists for Objectives 2 and 5(b) were being drawn up. These circumstances led the Member States to propose a large number of industrial and rural areas in difficulty as eligible for structural funding.

On Objective 2, the 15% mentioned is not a set limit but a target. It should be noted in this regard that the percentage geographical cover of the eligible areas remained unchanged between the 1989-93 and 1994-96 periods.

The Commission feels that geographical concentration should be increased in future so that assistance from the Structural Funds might be limited to areas affected by the most serious development or conversion problems. This is a necessary condition if Community assistance is to increase in effectiveness.

As regards coordination between loans and subsidies, there are improvements which could be made in future. There is, however, no link between the percentage of geographical cover of the areas eligible under the Structural Funds and the choice of loans or subsidies.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0458/97 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI), Amedeo Amadeo (NI), Roberta Angelilli (NI), Spalato Belleré (NI), Marco Cellai (NI), Gianfranco Fini (NI), Sebastiano Musumeci (NI), Gastone Parigi (NI), Salvatore Tatarella (NI) and Antonio Trizza (NI) to the Commission (19 February 1997)

Subject: Infringement proceedings against Italy

Persistent rumours in Brussels have it that Italy was fined approximately LIT 50 000 billion in all up to 1995.

What infringement proceedings have been instituted against Italy since 1990? In how many cases have the proceedings already been concluded, and in how many cases are they still under way? What total amount of fines has already been imposed on Italy to date? Will the fines in question have to be paid and, if so, within what periods of time?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (1 April 1997)

From 1 January 1990 to 6 March 1997, the Commission instituted 838 infringement proceedings against Italy. Over the same period, it concluded 708 proceedings. The number of procedings still under way against Italy at 6 March 1997 stands at 410.

No fines have been imposed on Italy to date. The Commission would point out that it has no power to fine a Member State which infringes Community law. Article 171 of the EC Treaty empowers it to propose a pecuniary penalty to the Court when a Member State does not implement a judgment by the Court of Justice establishing an infringement. This procedure has been applied in five cases, two of which have concerned Italy.

In the case concerning the failure to implement the Directive 75/442/EEC on waste disposal ((OJ L 194, 25.7.1975. )) in Campania, the Commission decided to propose a fine of ECU 123 900 for each day's delay. In the case involving the failure of Italian law to implement Directive 84/466/EURATOM on the radiation protection of persons undergoing medical examination or treatment ((OJ L 265, 5.10.1984. )), the amount of the proposed fine is ECU 159 300 for each day's delay. Once the Commission's proposal has been presented to the Court of Justice, the latter will give judgment on the principle and the amount of any pecuniary penalty which it may impose.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0859/97 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (12 March 1997)

Subject: Safety at work

With regard to budget heading B3-4310: Health protection, hygiene and safety at work, including a subsidy for the International Labour Office, can the Commission say whether subsidies have been granted for Italy and, if so, for which organizations and for which activities?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0858/97, E-0859/97, E-0860/97, E-0861/97, E-0862/97, E-0863/97, E-0864/97, E-0865/97, E-0866/97, E-0867/97, E-0868/97, E-0869/97, E-0870/97 and E-0871/97 given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (25 April 1997)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0690/97 by Maria Colombo Svevo (PPE) and Carlo Secchi (PPE) to the Commission (6 March 1997)

Subject: Human rights violations in Honduran prisons

According to information supplied by various NGOs, as many as 160 minors in Honduras are being held in adult prisons even though detention under these conditions is prohibited by the Honduran Constitution and Article 37(c) of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Can the Commission confirm that the above information is correct? If so, what steps will it take to halt such a blatant violation of human rights?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission (2 April 1997)

The Commission knows of cases of children in Honduras being imprisoned with adults but it cannot confirm the number mentioned by the Honourable Members.

It has, however, been able to ascertain that the Honduran authorities are aware of the problem and have started to take what steps they can to remedy matters. They have asked the Commission for its support in finding solutions. The Commission has responded favourably to this request all the more so as the Honduran government has displayed a willingness to take suitable measures to separate children from adults in the prisons and set up special institutions to ensure the physical and mental integrity of the children concerned.

The proposed project has three facets:

- understanding the special problems of children, notably street children, and finding solutions to them;

- strengthening the institutions dealing with children, such as the National Welfare Office, the Supreme Court and the Ministry of the Interior;

- carrying out prevention activities and measures to enable NGOs working with children at risk to provide more effective help.

The project dovetails with the Government's policy to strengthen the rule of law and help the most vulnerable sections of the population.

A new children's code has recently been approved and the project will make it easier to ensure it is put into practice.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0828/97 by Undine-Uta Bloch von Blottnitz (V) to the Commission (28 February 1997)

Subject: EU co-financing of the CAMPFIRE programme in Zimbabwe

It is known that the American development agency USAID provided US$ 7.6 million in support for the Communal Areas Management Programme for Indigenous Resources (CAMPFIRE) in Zimbabwe between 1989 and 1994 and that it intends to invest a further US$ 20.5 million in this project up to 1999. There are indications that the European Union has likewise allocated funds to the programme.

1. How much funding has the EU pledged, allocated and paid, and in what connection, the direct or indirect beneficiary being CAMPFIRE?

2. Please provide details of the purposes this financial aid is intended to serve.

3. Please state, in detail, who the recipients of the EU funding in Zimbabwe are.

4. Are detailed evidence, evaluation reports or other information concerning the use of the EU funding available? If so, can the Commission forward them to Parliament?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission (21 March 1997)

The Commission supports wildlife management in accordance with the Campfire principles in one integrated rural development programme in Kariba district in the north of Zimbabwe. The Campfire philosophy is in Zimbabwe advocated by the Campfire association, with a membership including all rural district councils, the government, and non governmental organizations (NGOs) such as the World wildlife fund.

The Community rural development programme is financed under the seventh European development fund and was preceded by a land use project under the sixth European development fund. Under the current project, with finance totalling 4.6 mecu, ECU 289 000 are allocated to wildlife management, in line with the Campfire philosophy.

The specific objective of the programme is to establish sustainable land use systems of which communal wildlife management in the fragile ecologies of the Mid-Zambezi valley is an important aspect.

The principal recipient of funds is the rural district council of Nyaminyami, because it is the council that has the legal authority for wildlife management in the area. The principal beneficiaries are the people living in the area. Funds are not directly transferred to the rural district council. Instead, costs for specific activities (training of game guards, consultancies to improve administrative and financial management of the rural district council) and capital investments (water points for wildlife, game guards' resthouses, electric game fencing to protect villagers) are reimbursed. Allocation of these funds is channelled through the annual work programmes of the project.

Every year, an annual work programme and cost estimate is produced. Progress on activities is reported quarterly and annually. Financial statements which are externally audited are submitted on a quarterly basis to the Commission. A major evaluation of all agricultural projects in Zimbabwe is ongoing. The final evaluation report, which will be issued during the coming months, could be made available to Parliament.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0476/97 by Carlos Robles Piquer (PPE) to the Council (19 February 1997)

Subject: China and Hong Kong

The Dublin European Council expressed its support for the 'representative democratic institutions as already established' in Hong Kong.

The Chinese Government has recently announced that it does not intend to respect these institutions. This has been confirmed by the new political leader chosen in Beijing to govern the so-called 'Special Administrative Region' (SAR). Mr Tung Chee-Hwa views individual rights as being in opposition to the common interest, as interpreted by the future executive authority.

Does the Council intend to respond to this announcement by China of its intention to violate the rights of the people of Hong Kong, given that the US Administration and the British Government did so immediately?

Answer (16 May 1997)

The President of the Council reiterated the position of the EU on the transition of Hong Kong and Macao as outlined in the conclusions of the Dublin European Council during a meeting of the EU Ministerial Troïka with the Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Qian Qichen in Singapore on 13 February 1997. The EU voiced its concern about recent moves by Beijing to expurgate the Bill of Rights of the future SAR (Special Autonomous Region) of some of its provisions guaranteeing basic democratic rights.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0610/97 by María Estevan Bolea (PPE) to the Commission (27 February 1997)

Subject: Auto/Oil Programme

How much money has the Commission spent on external work in preparing and drawing up the Auto/Oil Programme?

Can it give a breakdown of the cost, listing the activities in question?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (17 April 1997)

The Commission contracted for the following work (in ECU):

>TABLE>

Other work was also carried out or commissioned by industry, in particular the European programme on emissions, fuels and engine technologies produced jointly by Acea and Europia ((COM(96) 248. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0798/97 by Jean-Yves Le Gallou (NI) to the Commission (10 March 1997)

Subject: Community subsidies to associations, NGOs and various other bodies

With regard to heading B3-1001 (Socrates), can the Commission provide a complete list of associations and other bodies benefiting from Community subsidies and the exact amount of these subsidies for the last completed budgetary year, i.e. 1996?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (28 April 1997)

The Commission is sending the information requested direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.