ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0259/99

by Anna Karamanou (PSE) to the Commission

(5 February 1999)

Subject: Tragic situation of children in Albania - drugs, high mortality rate, trade in organs

A report submitted to the recent Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe by Mrs Eliza Potsa Taska describes the tragic situation of children in Albania who are victims of trafficking, abandonment, prostitution, AIDS and drugs. According to UNICEF, there are as many as 8000 young users in Tirana! A further tragic revelation is the trade in children's organs taking place between Albania and Italy.

Child mortality in Albania is the highest in Europe at 26 deaths per thousand, the rate being even higher in rural areas, and the number of women dying in child-birth is also high owing to the lack of monitoring during pregnancy. In what way does the Commission propose to intervene to put an end to all forms of child exploitation in Albania and effectively protect the human rights of children?

Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission

(8 March 1999)

The Commission is well aware of the prevalence of organised crime in Albania, which bears hardest on the most vulnerable members of the population, particularly children. The high crime rate is fuelled by the country's security problems, weak government and poor economic prospects, coupled with cultural factors. A comprehensive programme to foster stabilisation and development in Albania has been in place since late 1997 with international backing; the Community is the major contributor, having provided aid in excess of [fmxeuro]150 million, part of which is targeted on assistance for the police, the judicial system and the administration. Albania also receives humanitarian aid, which is used to repair medical facilities, including maternity units, and distribute medicines and food to the needy, including orphans and the poorest families.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0108/99

by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission

(2 February 1999)

Subject: Widespread killing of animals with poisoned bait

The phenomenon of the poisoning of animals is taking on worrying proportions in Italy.

Even the situation in cities is no better than elsewhere. Dogs and cats kept as pets are dying as a result of the illegal use of poisoned bait.

Although no precise data are available on the real extent of the phenomenon, considerable damage is clearly being done to the environment and wildlife.

The use of poisoned bait is illegal and in Italy the law specifically prohibits the use of such methods and provides for sanctions under criminal law.

Can the Commission set up a network to check and monitor the measures taken to protect animals and the environment?

Can the Commission call on all the Member States to tackle the problem by urging their citizens to report offences committed by private individuals or companies, perhaps by setting up a special free telephone service, as this would make it possible to set up a security network to protect animals and the environment?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(15 March 1999)

The Community competence is restricted only to cases related to species of wild fauna and flora of Community importance listed in the Annexes to Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds(1) and 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the Conservation of natural habitat and of wild fauna and flora(2). Thus, domestic animals such as cats and dogs are not included.

The Commission is aware that the use of poisoned bait may cause accidental deaths of species of Community importance. Only for those species, the Commission, in strict collaboration with national authorities, may intervene when a specific case is brought to its knowledge.

For those species, the Commission also supports a preventive approach financing various nature conservation projects under Life-Nature(3) that include actions targeting the control of illegal activities, (through wardening and awareness raising campaigns, ...).

The proposed network to monitor and control the use of poisoned bait does not fall under Community competence.

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979, modified by OJ L 59, 8.3.1996.

(2) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, modified by OJ L 31, 6.2.1998.

(3) OJ L 181, 20.7.1996.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0139/99

by André Fourçans (PPE) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Erasmus student exchange programme

Certain countries and universities taking part in the Erasmus student exchange programme do not recognise the equivalence of all units of study in the host country. This both undervalues the experience and hampers students who have to return to their country of origin to sit some of their examinations.

What does the Commission intend to do to prevent this type of nonsense and to ensure that all study abroad is recognised in the student's country of origin?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(18 March 1999)

The Commission shares the Honourable Member's concerns and is aware of the fact that even today some universities do not recognise the equivalence of all or part of the courses taken by their students abroad. However, since the Erasmus programme was launched the Commission has been striving to encourage recognition of diplomas and study periods spent abroad. Hence, in 1984 it created the network of National Academic Recognition Information Centres (NARIC) and in 1989 it proposed a system for transferring academic credits (the European Credit Transfer System - ECTS).

Membership of the ECTS system in the context of the institutional contract signed by the Commission and each institution participating in the Erasmus programme is entirely optional, since the higher education institutions are independent and free to decide on the equivalences. However, if they join the system they must offer each student participating in a mobility programme with their partners a contract indicating the courses to be attended and the number of credits granted. This contract must be signed by the student, the dispatching university and the host university. If the student fulfils the terms of his contract the credits obtained abroad are validated and automatically replace the courses which the student would have normally followed during this period at his university of origin.

The ECTS system was launched in 1989 between 145 universities. Currently, more than 1 300 institutions have introduced the system. It is to be hoped that with the year 2000 on the horizon this system, which is based on three fundamental principles - transparency, trust and recognition - will be generalised.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0686/99

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE) to the Commission

(26 March 1999)

Subject: 1999 tariff quotas for tuna loins

The current structure and mechanisms for the supply of tuna loins to EU countries reflect the legitimate interests of the Community fleet in a balance that has been achieved with great difficulty.

Will the Commission therefore explain why it has requested the opening of a new tariff quota which is completely at odds with the interests of the Community fleet, in that its natural market will be drastically reduced?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(7 May 1999)

The Commission does not consider that the opening of a quota, for a short period of time and a limited quantity, and subject moreover to tariff duty of 6 %, is likely to undermine the interests of Community shipowners or reduce their Community market share as regards supplies of tuna.

Indeed, the Community fleet disposes of a substantial part of its production in non-member countries in the light of requirements on the world market. It is significant in this respect that the fleet reduced its deliveries to the Community market by 15 % in 1998 as compared with 1996, and by 36 % in the case of yellowfin tuna, which is the species most sought after for high-quality canning.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0009/99

by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(19 January 1999)

Subject: Food safety

In the light of the findings of the Eurobarometer survey commissioned by DG XXIV on consumers' food safety perceptions, what measures is the Commission considering to overcome the growing confidence gap between consumer and producer?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(4 March 1999)

Confidence between producers and consumers primarily depends on the safety and quality of the products offered by the former to the latter.

The Commission, under several different aspects of its work, is pursuing a policy aimed at re-establishing the necessary confidence between producers and consumers.

Concerning food safety, it has reinforced its monitoring activities. The rigorous assessments carried out by the eight independent scientific committees which the Commission has established, together with the openness of the committees' work, are also helping to boost consumer confidence.

The Commission is striving to promote a policy of quality at the production stage, placing a premium on products with specific characteristics associated with the production method (organic farming, traditional specialities) or their geographic origin (designated origin, geographical indication).

As regards consumer information, at the end of 1998 the Commission, in conjunction with the Member States, launched a food safety campaign including a series of educational measures referring to the role that consumers themselves can play in order to ensure their safety, i.e. by using and storing food correctly.

A further objective of this campaign is to encourage discussion among the parties involved (agricultural producers, industries, distribution, consumers) on the question of food safety.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0156/99

by Phillip Whitehead (PSE) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: The new EMEA Procedure for Notification of Parallel Distribution of Centrally Authorised Medicinal Products

In the light of the recently published Procedure for Notification of Parallel Distribution of Centrally Authorised Medicinal Products (EMEA-H-HB-37678-1998), can the Commission please explain the basis upon which the sum of ECU 3 000 has been calculated as the administrative fee which is to be paid with each notification per product type? Is the Commission aware that such a level of fee is not only excessive when compared to the scale of fees payable to national regulatory authorities for the issue of a national PL(PI) Licence but is also likely to act as an impediment to the free movement of pharmaceutical products, as some products do not yield a sufficient profit margin to enable the proposed annual administrative charge to be met.

(NB: In the United Kingdom, for example, an importer will currently pay the sum of £1 000 per product for which he applies for a Licence to import and parallel distribute. The period of validity is five years, not one year, as proposed by the EMEA. The renewal fee is £250 for a further five years).

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(17 March 1999)

In accordance with section D of the Commission communication on the Community marketing authorisation procedures for medicinal products(1) the European agency for the evaluation of medicinal products (EMEA) checks compliance with the terms of the Community marketing authorisation in case of parallel distribution of centrally authorised products.

The [fmxeuro] 3 000 fee levied by the EMEA for checking notifications of parallel distribution of centrally authorised products covers all changes made during a one-year period. The level of this fee has been set on a cost recovery basis and is fully supported by the extent and frequency of the checks required (multilingual product information amended on average three to four times a year). The administrative charge levied by the EMEA in case of notification of parallel distribution is substantially lower than the possible maximum level of [fmxeuro] 5 000, fixed by Article 8 paragraph 2 of Council Regulation (EC) 2743/98 of 14 December 1887 amending Regulation (EC) 297/95 on fees payable to the EMEA(2). The fees levied by national authorities in case of parallel import cover only checks in one language and generally for a single operation only.

The level of the fee levied by the EMEA for checking notifications of parallel distribution of centrally authorised products will be reviewed at the end of 1999 taking into account the practical experience acquired in the operation of the procedure. The Commission is not convinced that a renewal fee of [fmxeuro] 3 000 is justified and has therefore requested the EMEA management board not to maintain this fee.

(1) OJ C 229, 22.7.1998.

(2) OJ L 345, 19.12.1998.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1607/99

by Raffaele Costa (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(7 September 1999)

Subject: European funding for Russia

According to reports from various international sources, at least some of the funds granted to Russia by the international community have been misappropriated to further private interests, and in some cases substantial amounts are involved; consequently there is an urgent need for effective monitoring of the use actually made of all European Union spending in Russia in recent years in the form of humanitarian aid, grants, loans on favourable terms and Community programmes under bilateral or partnership agreements.

Only the other day in Parliament's Committee on Budgetary Control it emerged that a large quantity of butter (6 750 tonnes) intended for Russia at preferential prices was illegally diverted to Poland and that the Commission records that would have provided evidence of the fraud disappeared from the Commission's offices in Brussels (Fléchard case).

Does the Commission not agree that it should obtain effective guarantees as to the use made of the funds provided and, above all, those funds committed but not yet paid?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(6 October 1999)

The Commission is aware of the current media speculation about money laundering in Russia and growing worries about the allegations of misuse of assistance funds provided to Russia. Clearly the results of current investigations in the Community and the United States must be awaited.

Community assistance is essentially grant based and is delivered through the TACIS programme. The funds involved are used to pay Community firms to provide technical expertise and advice for Russia and food aid which is being closely monitored and evaluated. They do not go directly to Russia. Moreover, at present Russia does not receive Community loans and the lending mandate of the European Investment Bank (EIB) for countries outside the Community does not extend to Russia.

On the question of butter destined for Russia which was diverted to Poland, the Commission would point out that the case dates back to 1991/1992. The buyer of the butter intended for Russia was a Community trader. His customers were Polish intermediaries. It is therefore difficult to make any direct connection with the allegations on which the Honourable Member's question is based.

The Honourable Member is also invited to refer to the Commission's statement to the Parliament during the debate on 16 September 1999.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0092/99

by Gerardo Fernández-Albor (PPE) to the Commission

(27 January 1999)

Subject: Community study centre devoted to Santiago de Compostela

The fact that the year which has just begun, 1999, is a Holy Year dedicated to Santiago de Compostela should prompt the Union to consider how its cultural heritage might be made to encompass the historical dimension spanning entire centuries of European practices revolving around a unique custom which has left its mark on the European genius.

Setting out from different starting-points, Europeans have, through many centuries, journeyed, endured difficulties, and fulfilled longings, and have consequently been more readily able to identify with a common cause, or the essence of our continent, just as other parts of the world have become identified with different expressions of their own culture.

To mark the Holy Year dedicated to Santiago de Compostela, does the Commission believe that the Union should take the decision to set up a study centre in the place lying at the heart of the tradition concerning St James - Santiago de Compostela - with a view to exploring the historical role of pilgrimages to that city within the unifying tradition of a spirit which has helped to bring the European continent as a whole culturally closer together?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(11 March 1999)

The Commission shares the Honourable Member's view on the religious and cultural heritage importance of "Santiago de Compostella" for Europe. It is in this context, that in the framework of its cultural heritage actions and Raphael programme, the Commission has, in the last few years, supported financially the efforts of the Spanish authorities to preserve and enhance monuments along the Saint Jacques de Compostelle pilgrimage route.

A study centre devoted to "Santiago de Compostella", would certainly contribute towards a better understanding of the historical role of pilgrimages and their positive effect in European cultural heritage terms. However, it has to be noted that in application of the subsidiarity principle and given the limited resources available, the Commission cannot take the decision of setting up such a centre. Any assistance on behalf of the Commission can, presently, only be envisaged within the framework of the Raphael programme which aims to encourage and support European cooperation initiatives in favour of the preservation and enhancement of cultural heritage as stipulated in Article 128 of the EC Treaty. In this context, should the Spanish authorities present a proposal which meets the criteria of the Raphael programme for 1999, as published in the Official journal(1), the Commission would gladly receive an application for consideration.

(1) OJ C 342, 10.11.1998.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1814/99

by Luciana Sbarbati (ELDR) to the Commission

(11 October 1999)

Subject: Protection for foodstuffs produced by small undertakings in Italy

In accordance with the undertakings given by the European Union, several vertical directives in the foodstuffs sector are to be simplified with a view to taking account of only those essential requirements which such products must meet in order to move freely within the single market.

Is the Commission sure that the quality and health standards laid down in those directives are not likely to hamper the development and protection of traditional foodstuffs produced by small undertakings, which are high-quality products that form part of the cultural heritage and, at the same time, are important both from an economic and employment point of view and as regards consumer protection?

How does it intend to prevent Italian small undertakings producing a wide range of foodstuffs (Fabriano salami, Fossa cheese, Colonnata bacon, honey, pasta, bread, chocolate, etc.) from being severely disadvantaged vis-à-vis multinational firms which produce foodstuffs on an industrial scale but to lower standards of quality?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(4 November 1999)

Among the other things Community food law is intended to protect public health by laying down rules covering hygiene and inspection. Those rules must be obeyed by all producers, whether small or industrial in scale.

The Commission has not had any feedback confirming that such arrangements, which have been in existence for years, hamper the development and protection of small-scale production or lowers its quality. Moreover, Council Regulation (EEC 2081/2 of 14 July 1992) on the protection of geographical indications location and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs(1) and Council Regulation (EEC) 2082/92 of 14 July 1992 on certificates of specific character for agricultural products and foodstuffs(2) enable traditional products to be promoted and protected if they meet the requisite conditions. A large number of agrifoods that are often produced on a small scale thus benefit from that designation at Community level.

(1) OJ L 208, 24.7.1992.

(2) OJ L 208, 24.7.1992.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1796/99

by Marco Pannella (TDI) to the Commission

(1 October 1999)

Subject: Abduction of Mr Vu Duc Binh and arrest of 24 members of the PAP

According to statements made by Mr Thomas Hammarberg, the UN Secretary-General's special representative for human rights in Cambodia, Mr Vu Duc Binh, a member of the Popular Action Party and opponent of the Vietnamese Communist regime, was abducted and arrested by the Cambodian police in August 1999 and is now in Vietnam. The official Vietnamese press has also reported that a court in Hanoi sentenced 24 members of the same opposition party to 224 years' imprisonment for illegally returning to Vietnam with the intention of overthrowing the Communist government.

What information does the Commission have on the abduction of Mr Vu Duc Binh, the arrest of 24 members of the Popular Action Party and their conditions of detention? What steps has the Commission taken, or does it intend to take, to seek the earliest possible release of these people? More generally, will the Commission state what measures it has taken or intends to take to promote democracy and the development of the market economy in Vietnam? Finally, has the Commission expressed to the Cambodian authorities its disapproval of Cambodia's involvement in the abduction of Mr Vu Duc Binh? If not, does it intend to do so?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(21 October 1999)

The Commission has so far had no information about the abduction of Vu Duc Binh in August or the arrest of 24 members of Vietnam's Popular Action Party other than the bare reports in the press and statements by the UN Human Rights Centre in Phnomh Penh, which are somewhat inconsistent. It has asked its delegations in Hanoi and Bangkok (for Phnomh Penh) to look out for any further details.

In the course of its relations with Cambodia and Vietnam the Commission consistently stresses the importance the EU attaches to observance of democratic principles and fundamental human rights, the principles of the UN Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action of the 1993 World Conference on Human Rights, as set out in the cooperation agreements with the two countries.