ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0955/98 by Gianfranco Dell'Alba (ARE) to the Commission (16 March 1998)

Subject: UNDCP programme in Afghanistan

On 19 February 1998 the European Parliament unanimously adopted a joint resolution on the situation in Afghanistan, which, in addition to reiterating 'its strong condemnation of the Taliban regime and its policy of systematic human rights abuses' (paragraph 1), expresses an extremely critical view of the programme which the UNDCP (United Nations Drug Control Programme) intends to carry out in Afghanistan, because of doubts regarding its political expediency and effectiveness and its implications for democracy. The programme provides for the allocation of funding to the Taliban regime to enable it to launch a programme for the phasing out of opium poppy cultivation. In this context the EP claims in recital I that 'the Taliban regime ... does not enjoy any international legitimacy' and in recital G that 'only lasting peace in the region will allow the roots of this trade to be tackled'. Consequently, the EP states (in paragraph 8) that it is 'deeply concerned at the agreement concluded by the UNDCP and the Taliban' and 'calls, therefore, on the Commission and the Member States to examine more closely the practical arrangements for the implementation of this agreement', going on to ask (in paragraph 9) 'for all aid and cooperation programmes (with the exception of humanitarian aid) to remain suspended until the government in Afghanistan shows respect for the human rights of men and women'.

The Vice-President of the Commission Mr Marin said in plenary 'we too undoubtedly share Parliament's doubts concerning the viability of the large-scale crop conversion programme proposed by the UNDCP, and we do not feel at present that the situation in Afghanistan is right for the introduction of an alternative development programme to combat the cultivation of opium poppies'.

Since the EU and the Member States are among the main contributors to the UNDCP programmes, what response does the Commission intend to make or has it already made to this declaration by the EP?

In particular, can the Commission ensure that no specific contribution will be made by the Community towards funding this programme?

Answer given by Mr Marin on behalf of the Commission (2 April 1998)

The Commission shares the Parliament's doubts concerning the feasibility of the United Nations drug control (UNDCP) programme in Afghanistan under the present circumstances.

In fact, these doubts are also shared by the Member States and therefore the Community has recently approved guidelines for donors who are considering giving assistance to UNDCP projects. According to these guidelines donors will 'try to ensure that projects and future programmes aimed at achieving poppy eradication are realistic and workable' and 'underline to UNDCP the importance of responding to donor concerns about its programme, including that its plans should be compatible with the United Nations wider political and aid objectives in Afghanistan, should take account of concerns about human rights and gender ...'.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0885/98 by Bill Miller (PSE) to the Commission (26 March 1998)

Subject: Access to documentation

Is the Commission aware of the decision of the Court of First Instance of 6 February 1998 (Case T-124/96) concerning access to documentation? If so, does the Commission intend to comply with point 6 of this decision which sets out a Code of Conduct? If so, does the Commission accept that point 6 states that the public will have the widest possible access to documents held by the Commission and the Council (documents in this instance meaning any written text, whatever its medium, which contains existing data and is held by the Commission or Council)?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (22 April 1998)

The Commission would inform the Honourable Member that points 4 to 6 of the judgment of the Court of First Instance of 6 February 1998 (Case T-124/96) are a very clear explanation of the system of access to documents introduced by the Commission in 1994.

The Commission adopted Decision 94/90/ECSC, EC, Euratom on public access to Commission documents on 8 February 1994 ((OJ L 46, 18.2.1994. )). This decision, which establishes a code of conduct agreed jointly with the Council on 6 December 1993, lays down the principle that the public should have the widest possible access to the institutions' internal documents. Access will be refused only where disclosure of a document might endanger public or private interests or threaten the confidentiality of the institution's proceedings.

The Commission would point out to the Honourable Member that its commitment to transparency is borne out by the statistics: in 1997 only 10% of requests were refused on the grounds of one of the exceptions provided for in the code of conduct.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0988/98 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI), Amedeo Amadeo (NI), Roberta Angelilli (NI), Spalato Belleré (NI), Marco Cellai (NI), Sebastiano Musumeci (NI), Gastone Parigi (NI), Salvatore Tatarella (NI) and Antonio Trizza (NI) to the Commission (2 April 1998)

Subject: Pre-accession negotiations with Slovenia

Fifty years after the end of the war, Slovenia's ambassador to Italy has stated that the time has not yet come for reconciliation between Italy and Slovenia. As is well known, there are still outstanding issues in the field of bilateral relations between the two countries (the return of property confiscated from the exiles forced to abandon their homes in 1947 and recognition of the brutal massacres carried out in the 'Foibe' limestone chasms), and for some time the two parties have been making diplomatic efforts to reach satisfactory solutions to these and other problems. The ambassador's remarks contrast sharply with these efforts, and are hardly consistent with his country's desire to accede to the EU, which stands for peace and harmony in international relations.

In view of the foregoing,

1. What is the Commission's opinion of the statement in question, in view of the forthcoming opening of pre-accession negotiations with Slovenia?

2. Does it agree that, regardless of questions that fall within the province of bilateral relations, this hostile stance is incompatible with the friendly relations, based on mutual respect, that prevail between Member States of the Union?

3. Does it agree that this imprudent and unacceptable attitude, which indicates contempt for human rights in respect of the two unresolved questions referred to above, could jeopardize the smooth progress and objective nature of the negotiations?

4. Does it agree that, as a useful and necessary preliminary to embarking on pre-accession negotiations with Slovenia, that country should be asked to clarify its position with regard to reconciliation with Italy?

Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (28 April 1998)

The Commission can inform the Honourable Members that the articles in the Italian press, which led to their questions, contained wrong information.

The declaration of the Slovene ambassador in Rome recently published in several Italian newspapers was immediately denied by the Ministry of foreign affairs in Ljubljana. The Ambassador confirmed that the press information did not correspond either with the official position of the Slovene government or with his personal view. In an official communication released the day after the interview, the Slovene Ministry of foreign affairs stated that bilateral relations between Italy and Slovenia were excellent and inspired by common interest for stability, friendly co-operation, common European future and reciprocal protection of their minorities in the respective countries.

Although the Commission is not competent for bilateral issues beween Slovenia and Member States, it is closely monitoring outstanding issues to ensure that pre-accession negotiations are smoothly and objectively carried out.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0454/98 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission (27 February 1998)

Subject: Persistence of the franchise system for mobile and personal telecommunications

Telecommunications services were completely liberalized in all the countries of the European Union on 1 January 1998.

Community Directives 90/388/EEC ((OJ L 192, 24.7.1990, p. 10. )) et seq. provide for abolition of the franchise system in favour of licences.

Presidential decree 318 of 19 September 1997 (implementing Community directives in the telecommunications sector) makes no mention of franchises.

1. Why has the Italian Government not abolished the state franchise tax and does it not conflict with European regulations?

2. Is the Commission aware that the franchise system tax will be abolished in the future?

3. Does maintenance of this tax not conflict with Community directives and is it not an obstacle to the development of telecommunications?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (1 April 1998)

1. The Commission does not have updated information about the state of the concession levy imposed on telecommunications operators as mentioned by the Honourable Member, although it would appear from bilateral contacts with the Italian authorities that the abolition of the levy is being discussed within the Italian government.

2. The Commission has not been informed of the timing of the abolition of the concession levy.

3. The regime introduced by Directive 97/13/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 10 April 1997 on a common framework for general authorizations and individual licences in the field of telecommunications services ((OJ L 117, 7.5.1997. )), moves away from the traditional concession approach and requires that fees are only imposed to cover the administrative costs incurred in the issue, management, control and enforcement of the relevant authorizations. The Italian government, which has already transposed these principles by DPR n. 319/97 of 19 September 1997, has now to take the necessary steps to comply with them. Under Article 22(1) of Directive 97/13/EC, Member States are required to make all necessary efforts to bring existing authorizations into line with the Directive before 1 January 1999. The Commission will monitor the process of adjustment of the existing authorizations.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0691/98 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) and Salvatore Tatarella (NI) to the Commission (10 March 1998)

Subject: Altener II

With reference to the proposal for a Council Decision concerning a multiannual programme for the promotion of renewable energy sources in the Community - Altener II (COM(97)87 final - 97/0106(SYN)) ((OJ C 192, 24.6.1997, p. 16. )), would the Commission define immediately, and not annually, the objectives, criteria and methods of access to funding, while maintaining the necessary flexibility with regard to funding levels within a predetermined range that does not lead to distortions of competition?

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission (5 May 1998)

The objectives of the proposal for a Decision concerning a multiannual programme for the promotion of renewable energy sources in the Community (Altener II) ((OJ C 192, 24.6.1997. )) are set out in Article 1, and its actions in Article 2. Priorities are discussed and established annually so as to target calls for proposals each year. The text of the call for proposals for 1998 was discussed at the meeting of the Altener Committee on 25 February 1998. The information brochure contains the list of priorities selected for each action, but also the criteria and methods to be applied throughout the duration of the programme. These criteria and methods of access are, in part, those generally applied in Community calls, but also include those which the Commission, following consultation of the Altener Committee, considers necessary in the light of the priorities.

Funding levels are established in Article 3 of the proposal for a Decision. In respect of targeted actions, given that the objective is to reduce unit costs, the establishment of predetermined ranges would prevent the play of competitive forces.
C 323/98 EN 21. 10. 98 Official Journal of the European Communities
Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission
(22 April 1998)
The Commission is sending direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliaments Secretariat a table containing
the information requested.
(98/C 323/146) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0946/98
by Jesu ·s Cabezo ·n Alonso (PSE) to the Commission
(30 March 1998)
Subject: Investment in Nicaragua
In what way is the Commission stimulating national and foreign investment in productive sectors in Nicaragua in
order to favour sustainable development in that country?
Answer given by Mr Mar ·n on behalf of the Commission
(23 April 1998)
One of the main objectives of Commission cooperation with Nicaragua is to encourage investment that will
contribute to the sustainable development of the country.
As part of Community financial and technical cooperation, the Commission is conducting an ambitious project
aiming to establish greater legal certainty for rural landowners, an essential factor in encouraging investment.
More generally, rural development cooperation, which has been a major focus of Community assistance,
contributes to improved socio-economic conditions and thereby helps establish the basic conditions for investorsto derive greater profit from their activities.
At the same time, the Commission is trying to promote foreign investment directly through economic
cooperation, by setting up a Euro-centre for business cooperation, organising trade fairs under the Al-Investprogramme and making the facilities of the European Community International Investment Partners (ECIP)available to international economic operators.
Lastly, the FEPEX (Fondo especial de promocio ·n de las exportaciones) and Foexca (Fomento de las
exportaciones en Centroame ·rica) programmes, designed to promote exports from Nicaragua through loans at
reduced interest rates, have also contributed considerably to an upswing in investments.
(98/C 323/147) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0954/98
by Gianfranco DellAlba (ARE) to the Council
(31 March 1998)
Subject: UNDCP programme in Afghanistan
On 19 February 1998 the European Parliament unanimously adopted a joint resolution on the situation in
Afghanistan, which, in addition to reiterating its strong condemnation of the Taliban regime and its policy ofsystematic human rights abuses (paragraph 1), expresses an extremely critical view of the programme which theUNDCP (United Nations Drug Control Programme) intends to carry out in Afghanistan, because of doubtsregarding its political expediency and effectiveness and its implications for democracy. The programme providesfor the allocation of funding to the Taliban regime to enable it to launch a programme for the phasing-out ofopium poppy cultivation. In this context the EP claims in recital I that the Taliban regime ... does not enjoy
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1415/98 by Riitta Myller (PSE) to the Commission (11 May 1998)

Subject: The right of citizens of the European Union to vote in local elections in the Member States

Citizens of the European Union are supposed to have the same opportunities to exercise citizens' rights, such as voting in municipal elections in the Member State where they live, even if they are not nationals of the State concerned, on the same conditions as nationals of that State. In principle, at least, this right is a significant step towards a stronger Citizens' Europe. However, shortcomings have emerged in the way in which this right is ensured in the Member States.

I would ask the appropriate Member of the Commision, therefore, why, for instance, citizens of the European Union residing in France were unable to vote in the local elections there. Does the term 'the right to vote at municipal elections', as used in the Treaty, apply only to municipal elections, or ought not all citizens of the European Union also to have the right, as a matter of principle, to vote in elections at other levels of local government, for example to the authorities of regions and departments in France? Ought not at least these rights, which promote the realization of the principles of the rule of law in the European Union, to be interpreted in accordance with the purpose for which they were adopted, so that citizens of the Union can participate in representative decision-making at local level outside their home country?

Moreover, how, in practice, is the right of citizens of the Union to vote in municipal elections guaranteed? Practical experience has shown that, inter alia in France, the right to vote in municipal elections has not been guaranteed to all citizens of the European Union.

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (10 June 1998)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the reply it gave to Oral Question H-316/98 by Mr White during question time at Parliament's April 1998 part-session ((Debates of the Parliament (April 1998). )).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0623/98 by Angela Billingham (PSE) to the Commission (9 March 1998)

Subject: Children and Juvenile Code in Guatemala

Is the European Commission aware that under the present Children's code in Guatemala, which was established in 1969, children can be indefinitely locked up 'for their own benefit' in dangerous, repressive, ill-equipped government juvenile detention centres where the use of torture and beatings has been documented? They have no right to a defence lawyer nor independent appeals.

Could the European Commission bring pressure on the Guatemalan Government to speedily implement the new Children and Juvenile Code which would make the child a 'subject' of law, with a right to legal defence and to participate in legal proceedings that affect him or her?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0623/98 and E-0624/98 given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission (17 April 1998)

The Commission thanks the Honourable Member for her interest in the problem of street children and, more especially, the children's code in force in Guatemala.

On the subject of this code and its successor (due to enter into force shortly), the Commission believes that the government's efforts to ensure actual and effective implementation need to be taken into account. To ensure the new code is both applied properly and obeyed by the relevant bodies, the government has put in hand a number of awareness campaigns, staff training courses and activities to prepare these bodies (legal institutions, the national board for children and youth, and the social welfare secretariat).

On the subject of the children themselves, the Commission is fully aware of the abuses and ill-treatment they suffer. This complex situation is known to be caused by social and economic factors (large-scale migration to the capital, breakdown of the family unit, loss of cultural identity and a life without prospects) and the Commission has been trying to tackle it with an ECU 2.5 million project that has been running since the start of the year.

The project, which has proved very effective, aims to give street children protection and direct assistance so they can return to normal life. It also sets out to promote activities to keep children away from a life on the streets and to strengthen the public institutions charged with protecting minors and putting child protection laws into effect ('secretaría de bienestar social', juvenile court, human rights ombudsman).

On this last point, the project has attempted to shelter children from abuse by setting up a unit where any such incidents can be reported, investigated and dealt with through magistrates and the courts.

Without impinging on national sovereignty, the Commission will continue to use its aid to support government efforts to protect the young. A project to reform the administration of justice in Guatemala is due to be launched in an attempt to support those bodies responsible for implementing the law, especially the children's code.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0417/98 by Freddy Blak (PSE) to the Commission (24 February 1998)

Subject: Combating unemployment

What EU funds are used to combat unemployment in the trade sector, broken down by area?

Which Directorates-General administer the funds, and what is the basis for assessing the priority to be given to the projects submitted?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (6 May 1998)

The European social fund (ESF) is the Community's main tool for developing human resources and improving the workings of the labour market throughout the Community. It is not sectoral in its approach, but covers a broad range of activities aiming to improve the employability of people on the local labour market by training them to fill the jobs available or by giving them access to new employment opportunities. Local authorities may, however, within the agreed Community support framework and in accordance with the ESF regulation propose specific programmes that favour local employment development in a specific sector. More than half of the amounts dedicated from the ESF to human resources development during 1994-1999 are spent on measures generally aimed at those excluded or exposed to exclusion from the labour market, but it is not possible to break these overall figures down by sector.

While the ESF is instrumental for enabling people with different points of attachment to the labour market to maintain or improve their employability, other structural funds like the European agricultural guidance and guarantee fund (EAGGF), the Financial instrument for fisheries guidance (FIFG) and the European regional development fund (ERDF) underpin and develop employment opportunities through investments in infrastructure and capacity building as well as through investment in rural areas and on farms. The criteria used for determining the nature of projects eligible for support from the structural funds are put forward in accompanying guidelines, most recently in the context of the mid-term review ((Community Structural Assistance and Employment, COM(96)109 final. Note for Guidance concerning operations in the declining industrial areas (Objective 2) for the second programming period 1997-1999 of 29.4.1996. Priorities for the adjustment of Structural Funds programmes to the end of 1999 - Commission Guidelines of 30.5.1997. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0297/98 by Leonie van Bladel (UPE) to the Council (17 February 1998)

Subject: Putting an end to terrorist activities planned in London

1. Can the Council President indicate how attacks were planned by groups who originated in Algeria, Bahrain and Egypt but used London as a base for plotting terrorist attacks to be carried out in the various countries?

2. Is the Council President prepared to indicate how an end might be put to the situation described above?

Answer (6 July 1998)

The question raised by the Honourable Member has not been discussed within the Council's subordinate bodies.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0668/98 by Sir Jack Stewart-Clark (PPE) to the Commission (10 March 1998)

Subject: Commission proposal for levy on blank tapes

I understand there is a Commission proposal to provide compensation to copyright holders for audio reproduction of their material by adding a levy to the cost of blank tapes, recording and copying equipment.

Such a proposal would have serious financial consequences on the local Talking Newspaper Associations in the UK. The Talking Newspaper Associations provide a valuable service for the blind and partially sighted persons by keeping them informed of news and events. Recordings are made onto blank cassette tapes and distributed free of charge to listeners.

Does the Commission intend to permit exceptions to this proposal to exempt non-commercial services, charities and Talking Newspaper Associations from having to pay a levy on recordings into blank cassettes?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (8 May 1998)

The Commission is conducting a detailed investigation of the problem raised by the Honourable Member and will inform him of the outcome as soon as possible.