ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0978/97 by Miguel Arias Cañete (PPE) to the Commission (17 March 1997)

Subject: EAGGF-Guarantee Fund in Spain

Can the Commission specify how much funding Spain received in total from the EAGGF-Guarantee Fund in 1996, giving a breakdown

per chapter (arable crops, sugar, fibre plants and silkworms, fruit and vegetables, other plant sectors or products, the vine-growing sector, tobacco, milk and milk products, beef and veal, sheepmeat and goatmeat, pigmeat, eggs and poultrymeat, other animal product aid measures, refunds on processed agricultural products, refunds in connection with EU food aid, the distribution of agricultural products to deprived persons in the Community, accompanying measures, rural development measures related to the operation of markets, other measures, income aid and the European Fisheries Guarantee Fund), and

per procedure (export refunds, compensatory pricing aid, 'area' aid, aid per head of stock, guidance premiums, private storage aid, withdrawal and similar operations, compensatory amounts, accompanying measures for reform of the CAP and public storage expenditure)?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0974/97, E-0975/97, E-0976/97, E-0977/97, E-0978/97, E-0979/97, E-0980/97, E-0981/97, E-0982/97, E-0983/97, E-0984/97, E-0985/97, E-0986/97, E-0987/97 and E-0988/97 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (6 May 1997)

Because of the length of the answer, which includes a number of tables, the Commission is sending it direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0836/97 by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission (10 March 1997)

Subject: Dog registration

In view of the continued existence of a 6-month quarantine period for dogs and cats entering the UK, what action has the Commission taken on implementing a European-wide system of dog registration since my report on the subject, which was carried by Parliament in 1990?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (8 April 1997)

At the moment the Commission has no plans to make proposals for implementing a Europe-wide system of dog registration. However, the Commission notes the increasing use throughout the Community of such identification and registration systems on a voluntary basis.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1130/97 by Carmen Díez de Rivera Icaza (PSE) to the Commission (24 March 1997)

Subject: Tourism and the IGC

What steps is the Commission taking to ensure that tourism is included as a separate title in the revised Treaty?

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission (25 April 1997)

As indicated in its report to the Council on civil protection, tourism and energy of 3 April 1996 ((SEC(96) 496. )), the Commission recognises the lack of specific basis for Community action in favour of tourism. This has not prevented the Community from undertaking and implementing action in favour of tourism, either in the framework of the Community's sectoral policies, or based on Article 235 of the EC Treaty.

However, direct action based on Article 235 of the EC Treaty is likely to become much more difficult, if not impossible, in an enlarged Community in which unanimity would still be required for taking decisions.

The Commission recognises that the continuity and coherence of Community action in these fields could be facilitated by inserting into the Treaty provisions which would make such action more efficient and more visible. However, the Commission is not asking for new powers in these areas and considers that it is for the intergovernmental conference to announce its position on the question of a separate title on tourism in the revised Treaty.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0908/97 by Kirsten Jensen (PSE) to the Commission (12 March 1997)

Subject: Marketing of breast-milk substitutes

1981 saw the adoption of the WHO code of marketing of breast-milk substitutes in a number of developing countries.

By way of follow-up, the Council adopted on 18 June 1992 a resolution on the marketing practices for breast-milk substitutes in third countries by Community-based manufacturers.

The aim of these measures is to support and safeguard breast-feeding and the WHO code contains an explicit ban on various forms of marketing of breast-milk substitutes.

Surveys by Britain's Institute of Child Health at the University of London and UNICEF are reported to show that five of the major manufacturers of breast-milk substitutes have marketed their products in breach both of the WHO code and the EU resolution. The five manufacturers are: Milco (Denmark), Nutritia (Netherlands), Nestlé and Gerber (Switzerland) and Wyeth (USA).

There does not appear to exist any specific legal basis for taking action against such practices. What steps does the Commission intend to take, in the light of the Council resolution of 18 June 1992, to influence the marketing practices of the EU-based manufacturers?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (25 April 1997)

The Council Resolution of 18 June 1992 on the marketing of breast-milk substitutes in third countries by Community based manufacturers recognised that the application of the international code on the marketing of breast-milk substitutes would ensure that marketing practices should not discourage mothers from breastfeeding.

It recognised also that the Community cannot legislate for third countries and therefore that it was for those countries to take the necessary measures to apply the international code in their territory as appropriate.

In respect of this principle the Community designated the Commission and its delegations to serve as contact points and receive any complaints or criticisms from the authorities of third countries with respect to the marketing practices of Community based manufacturers.

The Commission and its delegations have received no such complaint or criticism from the authorities of a third country which would induce any action in conformity with the Council resolution.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1129/97 by Carmen Díez de Rivera Icaza (PSE) to the Commission (24 March 1997)

Subject: European Tourist Agency

What steps is the Commission taking to follow up Parliament's repeated calls for such an agency to be created?

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission (25 April 1997)

The Commission considers that at this stage, following the consultation it had with the Parliament, the first priority in its policy in favour of tourism is the adoption by the Council of the first multiannual programme to assist European tourism, Philoxenia, which will open up significant possibilities for the sector.

The Commission considers that the examination of the issue of the creation of a European tourism agency should follow and not precede the decision on the establishment of a Community policy on tourism.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0983/97 by Miguel Arias Cañete (PPE) to the Commission (17 March 1997)

Subject: EAGGF-Guarantee Fund in Ireland

Can the Commission specify how much funding Ireland received in total from the EAGGF-Guarantee Fund in 1996, giving a breakdown

per chapter (arable crops, sugar, fibre plants and silkworms, fruit and vegetables, other plant sectors or products, the vine-growing sector, tobacco, milk and milk products, beef and veal, sheepmeat and goatmeat, pigmeat, eggs and poultrymeat, other animal product aid measures, refunds on processed agricultural products, refunds in connection with EU food aid, the distribution of agricultural products to deprived persons in the Community, accompanying measures, rural development measures related to the operation of markets, other measures, income aid and the European Fisheries Guarantee Fund), and

per procedure (export refunds, compensatory pricing aid, 'area' aid, aid per head of stock, guidance premiums, private storage aid, withdrawal and similar operations, compensatory amounts, accompanying measures for reform of the CAP and public storage expenditure)?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0974/97, E-0975/97, E-0976/97, E-0977/97, E-0978/97, E-0979/97, E-0980/97, E-0981/97, E-0982/97, E-0983/97, E-0984/97, E-0985/97, E-0986/97, E-0987/97 and E-0988/97 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (6 May 1997)

Because of the length of the answer, which includes a number of tables, the Commission is sending it direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1101/97 by Jesús Cabezón Alonso (PSE) to the Commission (21 March 1997)

Subject: Selection criteria for the European programme for the promotion of health

What is meant, in the European programme for the promotion of health, by 'large-scale projects' (a key selection criterion for the projects submitted): financial volume, duration, chances of implementation and viability, beneficiary groups or some other definition?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (30 May 1997)

The Commission is sending the information requested direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1117/97 by Carmen Díez de Rivera Icaza (PSE) to the Commission (24 March 1997)

Subject: The Blue Flag and the quality of bathing water

In order to avoid confusion could the Commission once again state that the Blue Flag is not awarded by the Commission and specify the nature of the foundation which does award it and the Commission's links with it?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (24 April 1997)

The blue flags are awarded by a non-governmental organisation, the Foundation for environmental education in Europe (FEEE). The organisation is based in Denmark (Scandiagade 13, DK - 2450 Copenhagen).

National operators in different countries in Europe, and not only in the Community, follow and examine beaches that have shown an interest in getting a blue flag. A great number of criteria are taken into account, such as facilities on the beach, environmental education programmes, safety equipment, and also water quality. The assessment of water quality is done on the basis of the guideline values (the most strict values) required under Council Directive 76/160/EEC concerning the quality of bathing water ((OJ L 31, 5.2.1976. )).

The Commission's involvement in the blue flag campaign is two-fold. It delivers the information on the bathing water quality of the Member States by means of its computer programme. Representatives of the Commission are also members of the European jury, which decides on problem cases. The Commission supports the blue flag campaign and the FEEE by a yearly financial contribution, which is revised and negotiated on a year by year basis.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1184/97 by Bartho Pronk (PPE) to the Commission (3 April 1997)

Subject: Statistics on poverty in the EU

The Commission's first report on economic and social cohesion in the Member States of the European Union says that the degree of poverty has increased in the 1990s. However, the report only provides figures for the late 1980s.

1. Can the Commission provide recent statistics on poverty in the EU Member States?

2. What conclusions can the Commission draw from these figures?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (29 April 1997)

The Commission is in the process of finalizing the publication of more recent statistics on poverty in Member States. Statistics will relate to 1993 and constitute for the first time comparable data for household income for the 12 Member States at that time. These data come from the first wave of the European Community household panel (ECHP), carried out in 1994. This survey has been repeated, yearly since then and will go on till the year 2000, enabling the Commission to produce regularly comparable data on poverty in the Community.

The Commission will ensure that a copy of the statistical report referred to will be transmitted to the Honourable Member as soon as it is published.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0504/97 by Lucio Manisco (GUE/NGL) to the Council (19 February 1997)

Subject: The Troika in Cuba

According to an IRELA document of 13 December 1996, it would appear that a Troika delegation is to visit Havana during the Dutch presidency.

1. Is it true that the Dutch Presidency is planning a visit to Cuba by the Troika?

2. What is the purpose of the visit?

3. Will the Council provide Parliament with information on the visit?

Answer (20 May 1997)

At the present time, the Presidency is not planning a visit to Cuba by the Troïka.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0103/97 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission (29 January 1997)

Subject: Importation of second-hand cars by Greece

In Greece, great uncertainty surrounds the issue of the importation of second-hand cars with catalytic converters. To be specific, there are reports that the liberalization of such imports is imminent, but this has not been confirmed by the Greek authorities, who are not making their intentions known.

This matter is very important both for Greek consumers and for the imported car sector, which provides thousands of jobs.

Have the Greek authorities provided the Commission with any information on this matter, and is there any indication of what is going to be done in the near future to permit the importation into Greece of second-hand cars (at least three years old), which will be affordable for the average Greek consumer?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (8 April 1997)

The Commission was not aware of the Greek press reports to which the Honourable Member refers without providing further clarification.

It shares the view that this is an important issue and assumes that the Honourable Member is alluding to the infringement proceedings instituted against Greece with regard to a number of discriminatory legislative provisions governing the importation of cars into Greece from other Member States.

The tax on a used car imported into Greece is calculated at a flat rate, namely its price when new less 5% per year for the first four years. Thus the tax base for such vehicles is always much higher than the real base. By contrast, for new cars, the basis for the consumption tax is the presumed selling price of the vehicle. Registration tax on used cars is based on engine size and charged at the same rate as on new cars, with the result that used cars bear a higher tax charge than new cars sold in Greece. Used cars do not qualify for tax reductions granted in the context of anti-pollution measures, in particular the special consumption tax for new cars.

The Commission would point out that it has referred these matters to the Court of Justice (Case C 95/375).

The Commission has also initiated infringement proceedings under Articles 30 to 36 of the EC Treaty (free movement of goods) in respect of the Greek regulations governing the importation of diesel-engined heavy goods vehicles and the use of diesel-engined private cars. A petition (No 691/95) on this matter has already been submitted to Parliament, and the Commission has written to the Greek authorities asking for further information.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1651/97 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission (5 May 1997)

Subject: Implementation of EC 258/97 Novel Food Regulation

The Novel Food Regulation EC 258/97 ((OJ L 43, 14.2.1997, p. 1. )) will come into force on 15 May 1997 and before this date all Member States will need to know how it is to be interpreted. Many issues concerning its implementation have not been resolved and the Commission has not published guidelines dealing with the most difficult questions of scope and labelling.

1. Why has the Commission not published guidelines dealing with Articles 1 (applicability), 2 (scope) and 8 (labelling) despite much room for dispute over interpretation?

2. Will gene maize and gene soya, already authorized for marketing, now be labelled under the Food Labelling Directive 79/112 ((OJ L 33, 8.2.1979, p. 1. ))and if so what detailed criteria will be applied?

3. Will the Commission confirm that under Article 8 of this regulation, the four separate labelling criteria listed under paragraphs (a) to (d) will be applied individually and independently of each other so that the foodstuff will be labelled if the conditions in any one of these subparagraphs are met?

4. What provisions are foreseen for prohibiting the use of novel ingredients and products in baby food as recommended by the Scientific Committee on Food?

5. Will the molecular structure and the use of DNA-destroying enzymes in novel foods be indicated in product applications and labels?

6. Will products or ingredients produced using gene technology or incorporating a GMO continue to be classified as novel if a substantially equivalent item has previously been approved under EC 258/97?

7. Will gene food products and crops already approved under Community or national legislation be treated as signifying previous use for human consumption to a significant degree within the Community?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (30 May 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-0982/97 by Miguel Arias Cañete (PPE) to the Commission (17 March 1997)

Subject: EAGGF-Guarantee Fund in the Netherlands

Can the Commission specify how much funding the Netherlands received in total from the EAGGF-Guarantee Fund in 1996, giving a breakdown

per chapter (arable crops, sugar, fibre plants and silkworms, fruit and vegetables, other plant sectors or products, the vine-growing sector, tobacco, milk and milk products, beef and veal, sheepmeat and goatmeat, pigmeat, eggs and poultrymeat, other animal product aid measures, refunds on processed agricultural products, refunds in connection with EU food aid, the distribution of agricultural products to deprived persons in the Community, accompanying measures, rural development measures related to the operation of markets, other measures, income aid and the European Fisheries Guarantee Fund), and

per procedure (export refunds, compensatory pricing aid, 'area' aid, aid per head of stock, guidance premiums, private storage aid, withdrawal and similar operations, compensatory amounts, accompanying measures for reform of the CAP and public storage expenditure)?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0974/97, E-0975/97, E-0976/97, E-0977/97, E-0978/97, E-0979/97, E-0980/97, E-0981/97, E-0982/97, E-0983/97, E-0984/97, E-0985/97, E-0986/97, E-0987/97 and E-0988/97 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (6 May 1997)

Because of the length of the answer, which includes a number of tables, the Commission is sending it direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0399/97 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (13 February 1997)

Subject: Community tobacco subsidies

In its report to the Council, the Commission has proposed that Community policy towards tobacco should be based on the following two principles:

- improving the quality of Community production by a graded system of higher premiums for quality produce;

- voluntary withdrawal from the sector.

If it is finally implemented, the second proposal will have an adverse effect on Greek tobacco producers. According to the Commission report, this proposal will mean principally that the Community will buy up quotas from producers with bonds covering a period of between seven and ten years. This will result in an overall reduction in national quotas and the abandonment of 'unviable' varieties, such as Basma, since they are grown on small areas of land, whereas it is in the interests of producers to maintain them and increase their production.

Given the importance of tobacco growing for Greece, will the Commission say:

1. how it intends to address the likely adverse consequences of its proposal, and in particular the scenario that growers of 'noble' varieties of tobacco that are cultivated on small areas of land sell up first, thus depriving Greece of quality crops and reducing opportunities for young farmers, owing to the absence of a national quota reserve?

2. whether it intends to implement its proposal for a graded increase in premiums gradually so as to avoid causing turmoil in this sector?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (20 March 1997)

1. The Commission would point out that its proposal to facilitate voluntary departure from the tobacco sector must not be taken in isolation. It is also proposing that transfer of quotas to higher value varietal groups be made easier and permanent transfer of quotas between growers allowed. In consequence voluntary departure from the sector would be a safety net for all those unable to continue their activities for reasons of holding viability or even to meet the new qualitative rules, and who have been unable to benefit from quota transfer possibilities.

The Commission has no intention of promoting reduced production of the high-value Oriental varieties. On the contrary it considers that production of them should be boosted by transfers from lower value varietal groups.

2. The Commission is ready to examine all factors contributing to differential premiums and will take due account of the Member States' concrete proposals on the extent and phasing-in of such differentiation in order that any disturbance of the sector may be avoided.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1041/97 by Umberto Bossi (NI) to the Commission (12 March 1997)

Subject: Waiting list for organ transplants

The Italian Transplant Council (a body within the Higher Institute of Health) recently decided to compile a national list of patients awaiting an organ transplant; the list should already have entered into force, but is not yet active.

Can the Commission supply up-to-date estimates of the number of persons (broken down by Member State) now awaiting an organ transplant?

To enable the hospitals specializing in organ transplants to coordinate their activities as closely as possible and, above all, to ensure that delays are reduced to a minimum for patients awaiting organs (especially children, who every day have to live in fear and suffer physical and emotional distress), does not the Commission believe that it would be desirable to introduce a Europe-wide waiting list?

What provisions exist to guarantee coordination among the hospitals authorized to perform transplants in the different Member States and avert de facto discrimination on account of poor communication between hospitals?

What international agreements regulate the entry of organs for transplant imported into Europe from third countries?

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

The Commission does not have information relating to the number of European citizens currently awaiting an organ transplant.

Although aware of the medical, social and ethical issues involved in organ donation and transplants, the Commission has no plans for legislative action to establish an European waiting list.

There are no legal provisions concerning the co-ordination of the transplantation centres of the different Member States. However, the Commission cooperates with the Council of Europe in efforts to improve information and co-ordination in this field.

The Community has not concluded any international agreement concerning the entry into the Community of organs for transplanting from third countries.