ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1305/96 by Johanna Maij-Weggen (PPE) to the Commission (22 May 1996)

Subject: Arrest of four journalists in Turkey

1. Is the Commission aware of the fact that in the night of 3 May, four Turkish journalists on the Turkish weekly 'Alinteri', namely Sabiha Budak, Filiz Uziurk, Mehtap Kuruçay and Incigul Basel, were arrested?

2. Is the Commission aware that Incigul Basel was later taken to a hospital, and that it was there suspected that she had been tortured?

3. Is the Commission aware that the whereabouts of the other three journalists are unknown, and that it has frequently happened in the past that Turkish citizens who have been arrested have subsequently disappeared?

4. Will the Commission now act promptly to ask the Turkish authorities for clarification of these arrests, having regard in particular to Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which has been transposed into Turkish law and guarantees freedom of expression?

Supplementary answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (30 May 1997)

Following the question from the Honourable Member the Commission wrote to the Turkish authorities for particulars on the facts reported. The Turkish authorities informed the Commission that the four journalists from the daily newspaper 'Alinteri' were released on 17 May 1996.

The Human Rights Foundation, Ankara, has confirmed this to the Commission's Representation in the country.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0932/97 by Miguel Arias Cañete (PPE) to the Commission (12 March 1997)

Subject: The EDF and the fisheries agreement with Comoros

Can the Commission say what appropriations were paid to Comoros under the EDF in 1995 and 1996 to finance the development of the national fisheries sector, and can it list the specific products for which this aid was used?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0923/97, E-0924/97, E-0925/97, E-0926/97, E-0927/97, E-0928/97, E-0929/97, E-0930/97, E-0931/97, E-0932/97, E-0933/97 and E-0934/97 given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission (23 April 1997)

In reply to questions on allocations and specific projects to develop the fisheries sector in 12 African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries, a document listing fisheries projects in developing countries that have received EC aid has been sent to the Honourable Member and lodged with Parliament's General Secretariat.

The document comprises tables giving detailed information including the types of project, their objectives, the recipients and the Community contribution.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0882/97 by Agnes Schierhuber (PPE) to the Commission (12 March 1997)

Subject: Amount of Community funding allocated in 1996 to Austria and its individual federal states

Since the referendum on Austria's accession to the European Union in 1994, those critical of Austria's EU membership have greatly increased in number.

One of the chief subjects of criticism is the contribution Austria pays to the EU. Furthermore, it is often argued that Austria is not exploiting to the full the subsidies available within the EU.

This prompts the following questions:

1. What was the total amount of payments made by the EU from all available Community sources to Austria in 1996?

2. What payments were made by the EU in 1996 to the individual federal states of Austria?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (28 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-1015/97 by Anne André-Léonard (ELDR) to the Commission (19 March 1997)

Subject: Med-Media programme

Following the 1995 Ministerial Conference in Barcelona, the Commission decided, in accordance with the guidelines adopted by the EU Member States and their partners under the MED programmes, to review the Med-Media forms of intervention.

The resulting freezing of funds earmarked for Med-Media actions has created serious difficulties for certain economic operators promoting projects supported by Med-Media. This applies to certain film productions whose funding and implementation cannot be envisaged without Med-Media support.

Is the Commission aware of the problems created and the harm done to the economic operators concerned (film producers) as a result of the failure to allocate the promised funds? Will it inform Parliament of Med-Media's new intervention procedures and the date on which these are to become operational and funds to be released for 1997?

Answer given by Mr Marin on behalf of the Commission (5 may 1997)

The Commission is currently setting up a new management system for the programmes of decentralised co-operation in the Mediterranean region, following a Court of auditors report and the support given by the ministers of Foreign Affairs at the Euro-Mediterranean conference in Barcelona, in November 1995, to decentralised co-operation, underlining the importance attached to this form of co-operation.

The Commission is aware of the difficulties the freeze creates for some participants in the programmes for decentralised co-operation in the Mediterranean. However, a temporary freeze of the programmes was necessary in order to ensure the transparency and efficiency of the management system.

The Commission will inform the Parliament of all results before relaunching the Med programmes.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0924/97 by Miguel Arias Cañete (PPE) to the Commission (12 March 1997)

Subject: The EDF and the fisheries agreement with Cameroon

Can the Commission say what appropriations were paid to Cameroon under the EDF in 1995 and 1996 to finance the development of the national fisheries sector, and can it list the specific products for which this aid was used?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0923/97, E-0924/97, E-0925/97, E-0926/97, E-0927/97, E-0928/97, E-0929/97, E-0930/97, E-0931/97, E-0932/97, E-0933/97 and E-0934/97 given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission (23 April 1997)

In reply to questions on allocations and specific projects to develop the fisheries sector in 12 African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries, a document listing fisheries projects in developing countries that have received EC aid has been sent to the Honourable Member and lodged with Parliament's General Secretariat.

The document comprises tables giving detailed information including the types of project, their objectives, the recipients and the Community contribution.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0262/97 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (7 February 1997)

Subject: Enlargement and reform of the structural funds

Is the Commission aware that citizens may be deterred from contributing to debate about the reform of the structural funds post-1999 by reports that these funds will be diverted to new Member States in an enlarged EU from that date?

Can the Commission confirm that the European Union will continue to support principles of cohesion within the existing Member States and that an 'open review' will take place, incorporating the needs of disadvantaged localities and regions throughout the European Union?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (18 March 1997)

The Commission will present to the Council after the conclusion of the inter-governmental conference its proposals for the future financing of all Community policies. This will be followed by proposals to the Council for new regulations setting out the priorities, criteria and methods specifically for the next generation of structural policies which will be implemented from the year 2000.

The Commission has already presented some first reflections on future structural policies in the cohesion report published in November 1996 ((COM(96) 542. )). In its conclusions, within the context of the overall effort to improve efficiency, the report recognises, on the one hand, the need to 'guarantee long-term support to the poorest regions' of the fifteen and, on the other hand, the need to assist 'the process of adjustment affecting different regions, local communities and social groups' in the rest of the Community.

In addition, to help to prepare for the future the Commission has organised a conference on structural policies, the cohesion forum, which will be held in Brussels on 28-30 April 1997. The forum has drawn an enthusiastic

response from national, regional and local authorities, social partners, research institutes and representative organisations from across the Community who have been invited to take part. Delegates will have an opportunity to reflect on past achievements and to contribute, at an early stage, to the debate on the future direction of structural policies.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0552/97 by Ulf Holm (V) to the Commission (21 February 1997)

Subject: EMU and labour mobility

International research findings suggest that a high level of cross-border mobility of labour will be needed in order for monetary union to function satisfactorily. There is little mobility among the EU countries at present, and it is expected to be many decades yet before mobility reaches the level required for monetary union. This means that monetary union will not be appropriate for a very long time, in that it would have an adverse impact on the Member States' economies.

Has the Commission had any research of its own performed to ascertain the consequences in this respect?

Does the Commission consider that the low level of labour mobility could have any effect on the possibility that monetary union will produce good results?

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission (14 avril 1997)

Cross-border labour mobility is relatively low in the Community, in particular in comparison to mobility within the United States. However, data from the Organization for economic cooperation and development show that in Australia and Canada, which are monetary unions one may compare with a future economic and monetary union (EMU), inter-regional mobility is not considerably higher than in many European countries and is significantly lower than in the United States. The comparison with the United States that is frequently used to show that the Community is not an optimal currency area is thus perhaps not such a convincing argument. The examples of Australia and Canada provide another argument showing that the role of labour mobility may not be as important as may be suggested in the literature.

In EMU, Member States will no longer be able to use their exchange rate as an instrument to deal with country-specific economic shocks. However, a fundamental issue is whether the non-availability of the exchange rate instrument in EMU actually is such a big loss. First of all, it may be argued that - given the economic convergence in the Community - the likelihood of shocks just hitting one Member State is rather small. Studies have found that in the Community a large proportion of employment shocks are regional and not country-specific. Furthermore, exchange rate adjustments are not appropriate when dealing with industry specific shocks. Neither are they appropriate in case of long lasting shocks because they would hinder necessary structural adjustments. Finally, studies show that interregional migration even within Member States is not substantial in response to shocks. Therefore, one may argue that the present currency areas in Europe are not substantially superior to a future EMU.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0546/97 by Johanna Maij-Weggen (PPE) to the Council (24 February 1997)

Subject: Delay in the construction of the Palestinian port on the coast of the Gaza Strip

Can the Council ask the Israeli Government for clarification of the persistent delay in the construction of a port on the coast of Gaza, despite the fact that the funds for the construction of that port are available from European Union Member State funds (especially the Netherlands)?

Answer (20 May 1997)

The Council has on several occasions expressed concern about the delay in the construction of the Gaza port and the fact that the already constructed Gaza airport is not yet operating. The Council believes these facilities to be crucial for the long term viability of the Palestinian economy, and the issue is among the main priorities for the mission of the EU Special Envoy to the Middle East Peace Process, Mr Moratinos.

The Council hopes that the committee established by the Israeli government and the Palestinian Authority to deal with outstanding problems in relation to the port and airport will soon be able to arrive at a positive result, taking into account both Israeli security concerns and the Palestinians' need for an adequate transport infrastructure in the Palestinian territories.

The EU special Envoy is currently engaged in a close dialogue with both sides to explore what the EU could do to help promote a solution.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0291/97 by Gianfranco Dell'Alba (ARE) to the Commission (13 February 1997)

Subject: STET

As part of its efforts to cover the IRI debt, the Italian Government has undertaken at European level to move ahead with the privatization of the STET, with due regard for the European rules in force on competition and liberalization of the telecommunications sector.

However, the Italian parliament has recently rejected the decree providing for the separation of the STET from the IRI as a precondition for subsequent privatization and, as a result, the direct control of the firm by the State - as allowed under a provision contained in the finance law - is no longer subject to any specific procedures or set deadline.

1. Does the Commission not therefore consider that the acquisition of STET should be seen as a state aid and as such contrary to the relevant provisions of the EC Treaty?

2. Does the Commission not consider that, under the circumstances, the conditions on which the agreement with the Italian Government for the rescheduling of the IRI debt is based will not be met?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0291/97 and E-0417/97 given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission (20 March 1997)

In the context of the undertaking given by Italy to reduce IRI's indebtedness ((OJ C 267, 2.10.1993. )), the transfer of STET to the Treasury satisfies the necessary conditions for complying with that undertaking and its extension.

The Italian authorities have informed the Commission that the Italian Parliament's vote on the STET decree does not call into question the transfer of STET to the Treasury. That transfer has already taken place pursuant to Article 2(182) of the measure linked to the Finance Act which definitively approved the rules allowing purchase by the Treasury.

The transaction does not involve state aid in so far as the Treasury is to purchase IRI's interest in STET at the market price, which is to be determined by independent consultants.

The arrangements for transfer to the Treasury stipulate that the provisional minimum value of the transferred holding is fixed at LIT 14 530 billion, which may be adjusted upwards if the consultants arrive at a higher value.

If the consultants' valuation were to prove lower than the above amount, the transaction would have to be regarded as involving elements of state aid that would have to be examined by the Commission in the light of Article 92 of the EC Treaty.

The validity of the independent consultants' valuation could be confirmed, among other things, by the market price if the Treasury were to place the shares in STET on the market fairly soon after the valuation was made.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0602/97 by Alex Smith (PSE) to the Council (27 February 1997)

Subject: UN special session on the environment

What proposals are to be presented by the Council to the special session of the United Nations General Assembly on 'Environmental and sustainable development progress since the Earth Summit in Rio in June 1992' to be held in New York in June 1997?

Answer (20 May 1997)

At its meeting on 9 December 1996, the Council approved guidelines for the EU position at the special session of the UN General Assembly to be held in New York in June 1997. Those guidelines, which were published in the press release issued after the Council meeting, confirmed and elaborated upon the European Union's

opinion that Agenda 21 should not be renegotiated but that it will be necessary to maintain the momentum of the process which has been under way since UNCED and formulate a political declaration to that effect.

At the meeting of the Intersessional Working Group preparing for CSD-V and for the special session, the European Union explained its position and submitted a series of more detailed positions as well as a number of suggestions to help in making progress with the finalization of that political declaration, on the basis of a document from the CSD Secretariat, during CSD proceedings in April 1997.

The European Union intends to continue playing an active role in this process, and will lay particular emphasis on the urgent need for action on water, oceans, forests and energy. The Union will also lay special emphasis on certain aspects to do with finance and technology transfer.

Lastly, the European Union considers that the CSD should continue to play a central role in the implementation of Agenda 21 and the other Rio commitments and should act as a catalyst for sustainable development at all levels.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0405/97 by Arthur Newens (PSE) to the Council (14 February 1997)

Subject: Outcome of the population 'experts group'

How many times did the population 'experts group' meet in 1996? What was the outcome of these meetings? What steps are being taken to improve coordination between the EU and its Member States on population and reproductive health assistance?

What is the timetable for meetings in 1997? What issues are on the agenda for the forthcoming meetings?

Answer (16 May 1997)

The Council does not have a population experts group. The Honourable Member is probably referring to a Commission or United Nations group.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1127/97 by Carmen Díez de Rivera Icaza (PSE) to the Commission (24 March 1997)

Subject: Use of dura mater in the European Union

- What are the risks of transmission of disease as a result of using these membranes?

- Why are the available synthetic substitutes not always used in the European Union, so as to limit such risks, especially in the wake of the BSE epidemic?

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

There is indeed a risk of transmission of Creutzfeld-Jacob Disease (CJD) through a dura mater graft during surgery. Some twenty cases have been recorded around the world. There is also a risk of contamination from inadequately sterilised instruments used in neurosurgery. One case has also been reported in 1997 in connection with a cornea graft.

The monitoring of this risk involves an examination of the arrangements for evaluating the safety of medical and surgical procedures within the healthcare systems of each Member State, and is thus a matter for regulation by the individual Member States.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0470/97 by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission (12 February 1997)

Subject: UEFA breach of European competition law

Will the Commission write urgently to UEFA to inform them that any attempt to prevent proper open competition between the football associations of two Member States for the World Cup in 2006 would be in clear breach of European competition law?

Will the Commission remind them of the penalties?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission (6 March 1997)

The Commission does not have the necessary information to give an opinion on the Honourable Member's question.

The assessment of the compatibility of possible restrictive behaviour of professional sporting organisations with Community competition rules can only be made in full knowledge of the facts in their correct economic context and taking into account the specific nature of the sector concerned. Moreover, such assessment must be made under the established procedures ((Council Regulation No 17 of 6.2.1962 - OJ 13, 21.2.1962. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0414/97 by Christa Randzio-Plath (PSE) to the Council (14 February 1997)

Subject: Participation by the Council at the G7 finance meeting on 8 February 1997

Can the Council confirm that it has not been invited to take part in the G7 finance meeting in Berlin on 8 February 1997, at which the Euro will be discussed?

If this is the case, how can the Council ensure that Community bodies will be able to take part in international meetings to discuss the international dimension of the Euro, particularly with regard to implementation of Article 109 of the EC Treaty ((Determination of the rate of the Euro in relation to non-Community currencies. )) during the third phase of EMU and with regard to strengthening international monetary cooperation?

Answer (16 May 1997)

Neither the Council nor the Commission were invited to the recent G7 (finance) meeting in Berlin. This meeting did not discuss the future exchange rate policy for the euro in relation to non-Community currencies. However, non-European participants of the meeting were briefly informed about the agreement on EMU reached by the European Council in Dublin.

As for the second part of the question, it is recalled that the modalities for the implementation of international monetary cooperation in Stage 3 of EMU, involving relations between the euro and non EU currencies will be reflected upon as part of the preparation for Stage 3 of EMU and will be decided by the Council in accordance with the rules of procedure laid down in Article 109 of the EC Treaty.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0986/97 by Miguel Arias Cañete (PPE) to the Commission (17 March 1997)

Subject: EAGGF-Guarantee Fund in Portugal

Can the Commission specify how much funding Portugal 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.