ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2436/98

by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission

(30 July 1998)

Subject: EU support for European press publications

Through DG X the Commission finances a host of actions, many of which cannot be described as particularly objective; one example is the "information campaign" for the euro which is in fact more like a "propaganda campaign", since the disadvantages of the Single Currency are passed over in complete silence, while its advantages are idealized. While millions of ecus are allocated to support dubious actions (which very obviously damages the prestige of the Commission and its image with the European public), there does not appear to be any specific strategy to support European press publications (newspapers and periodicals).

Will the Commission say whether it intends to adopt a specific initiative to provide financial support for newspapers and periodicals within the framework of the EU, which would help European press publications meet increased costs and contribute (effectively and transparently in this case) to ensuring that the European public receives objective information?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(1 October 1998)

As a democratic institution mindful of transparency, the Commission is bound to explain to citizens the significance and meaning of its action. It is for that reason, and not for propaganda purposes, that it informs the public of its proposals and of the main achievements of the Union. It does this in conjunction with Parliament and its departments. The Commission consults the national authorities and the circles concerned on its action; the priority information action on the euro is a case in point.

In view of the subsidiarity principle, the Commission feels that the matter of press production costs, however worrying it may be, should first of all be treated at the level of the Member States. Thus it is not the Commission's intention to grant financial assistance to daily newspapers or other periodicals.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2423/98

by Concepció Ferrer (PPE) to the Commission

(30 July 1998)

Subject: Provision of information concerning new regulations affecting third countries

The Council recently adopted a regulation relating to the generalised tariff preferences for agricultural and industrial products exported to the EU by developing countries which uphold employment rights and protect the environment.

Could the Commission say what action has been taken to ensure that the third countries which are affected by the above regulation are aware of it? What is the procedure normally used by the Commission in such cases?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission

(16 September 1998)

Since the entry into force of Council Regulation (EC) 1154/98(1) applying the special incentive arrangements concerning labour rights and environmental protection provided for in Articles 7 and 8 of Regulations (EC) 3281/94(2) and (EC) 1256/96(3), the Commission has held an information meeting in the Community for representatives of the beneficiary countries.

In addition, the Commission plans an annual series of information seminars on the scheme of generalised preferences to be held in the beneficiary countries, which will of course emphasize the implementation of the special incentive arrangements, plus a specific awareness campaign targeting the various groups affected by the new schemes - producers, importers, governments of beneficiary countries, trade unions and non-governmental organisations working in the countries concerned.

(1) Council Regulation (EC) 1154/98 of 25 May 1998 applying the special incentive arrangements concerning labour rights and environmental protection provided for in Articles 7 and 8 of Regulations (EC) 3281/94 and (EC) 1256/96 applying multiannual schemes of generalised tariff preferences in respect of certain industrial and agricultural products originating in developing countries: OJ L 160, 4 June 1998.

(2) Council Regulation (EC) 3281/94 of 19 December 1994 applying a four-year scheme of generalised tariff preferences (1995 to 1998) in respect of certain industrial products originating in developing countries: OJ L 348, 31 December 1994.

(3) Council Regulation (EC) 1256/96 of 20 June 1996 applying multiannual schemes of generalised tariff preferences from 1 July 1996 to 30 June 1999 in respect of certain agricultural products originating in developing countries: OJ L 160, 29 June 1996.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3038/98

by Astrid Thors (ELDR) to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Spread of resistant MDR-TB in Russia

According to the Guardian (23.9.1998), a mutant form of tuberculosis called multi-drug resistant TB-MDR-TB is spreading quickly in Russian prisons. Ordinary TB in Russia can be treated in six to eight months, MDR-TB takes 18 months to treat and there is only a 60-85 % chance of survival. Furthermore, the treatment of MDR-TB is very expensive compared to the treatment of traditional TB. MDR-TB is spreading quickly in overcrowded Russian prisons and is passed on into the rest of society as prisoners are freed and through prison personnel. Obviously MDR-TB knows no national borders. Tackling the crisis is going to prove very expensive even according to modest estimates.

What is the Commission going to do to help Russia stop the spread of MDR-TB and thus combat a major threat to Russia, Europe and the rest of the world?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(16 November 1998)

The Commission shares the concern of the Honourable Member about the dramatic increase in tuberculosis (TB) cases in the Community of Independent States (CIS) in the 1990s. In the Russian Federation, the case rate rose by 42 % between 1991 and 1994. In the period 1995-1996, a further increase by 4 % was observed. By 1996, tuberculosis had become the most important lethal infectious disease in the country.

The World health organisation (WHO) advocates DOTS (directly observed therapy short course) a relatively cheap and effective scheme of curing TB patients and preventing transmission, but this has unfortunately proved difficult to implement in the Russian Federation due to lack of drugs and the fact that treatment preferences vary among local medical staff. Treatment methods are often changed during a cure, favouring the increasing appearance of drug resistant bacteria.

Throughout the last year, the Commission has been funding specific humanitarian projects addressing this problem (DOTS training for local medical staff, provision of drugs). These activities have been focusing on prisons in Central Siberia, where the TB issue is particularly important.

While it is understood that the scientific aspects of TB, including the potential adaptation of existing treatment methods to multiple-drug resistant bacteria, have to be addressed by specialised agencies such as WHO, the Commission is considering the continuation and possible expansion of its programmes in the Russian Federation.

However, it has to be stressed that the medium-term success of these efforts will depend on effective implementation of the recommended treatment strategies by local medical authorities.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2758/98

by Richard Corbett (PSE) to the Commission

(10 September 1998)

Subject: Use of hired cars from third countries

Can the Commission confirm or deny that it has recently become illegal for a hire car from a non EU state to be driven in an EU country by an EU citizen?

Do EU tourists who have hired a car in Switzerland, but cross the border into Austria, France, Germany or Italy, face fines and prosecution?

If this is so, what possible justification can there be in such a Directive?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(7 December 1998)

Under Article 719(11)(b) of Regulation (EEC) 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code(1), persons established in a Member State may only place a hired vehicle registered in another country under the temporary admission procedure for the purpose of returning to the Member State in which they reside. This is not a new provision; it has been in force since 1993. The Istanbul Convention of 26 June 1990, approved by Council Decision No 93/329/EEC of 15 March 1993 concerning the conclusion of the Convention on Temporary Admission and accepting its annexes(2), contains similar provisions.

Persons using a vehicle registered in a non-Community country (such as Switzerland) in breach of the provisions described above may face prosecution and a fine as a result. The reason for this restriction is to prevent evasion of Community vehicle tax.

(1) OJ L 253, 11.10.1993.

(2) OJ L 130, 27.5.1993.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3055/98

by John Cushnahan (PPE) to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Manchester United

What action will the Commission take to ensure that the proposed acquisition of Manchester United by BSkyB does not conflict with EU sport broadcasting policy?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(11 December 1998)

The proposed acquisition of Manchester United by BSkyB is not an isolated event. Such operations, involving television companies owning sport clubs, have become a frequent practice in Europe (as was already the case in the United States). The Commission keeps a close watch on all instances of interpenetration between the world of sport and the audiovisual industry and will ensure that such acquisitions comply with Community rules, where appropriate.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-3241/98

by Patrick Cox (ELDR) to the Commission

(19 October 1998)

Subject: Recommendation 1030/96 from the Committee on Petitions - safety standards for riding helmets

Following the recommendation from the Committee on Petitions (1030/96) concerning the EN1384 standard for riding helmets and the Commission's obligation to comply with Directive 89/686/EEC(1), can the Commission indicate what progress has been made to date, if any, on the "urgent review" requested by the Committee on Petitions?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(18 November 1998)

In September 1998 the Commission sent, as requested, information relating to EN 1384 standard "Helmets for equestrian activities" to the petitions committee of the Parliament.

Three enquiries are presently launched within the European committee for standardisation (CEN) (technical committee CEN/TC 158 "Head protection" and its working group WG5 "Helmets for horse riders") on EN 1384. The first pertains to the normal procedure of revising standards every five years. WG 5 has started work on the next revision of EN 1384 which is due in 2001. The second concerns a draft amendment to EN 1384 which was issued by CEN for enquiry in July and will finish in December 1998. The third will answer the specific issues raised by the petitioner.

The questions put by the petitioner were addressed specifically and in the general context of the work programme for EN 1384 and last discussed at the meeting of TC158/WG5 on 14 October 1998. The petitioner was present at that meeting and has been invited to take part in future work. It was decided to launch a third enquiry in parallel to the two previous enquiries, on the revision and the draft amendment. Its aim will be to determine the main causes of injury in riding accidents and review the relevant statistics. To that effect a questionnaire has been prepared and circulated by the convenor. An answer is awaited from each delegation in January 1999. These questionnaires will also be sent to the equestrian federations.

The next meeting of the working group is planned at the beginning of March 1999.

(1) OJ L 399, 30.12.1989, p. 18.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2533/98

by Graham Mather (PPE) to the Commission

(1 September 1998)

Subject: Commission information campaign spending

In document COM(98) 39, the Commission states that ECU 21 million is available for the information strategy on the Euro during 1998.

1. What is the breakdown of this figure by the amount spent in each Member State and, in particular, what proportion of it will be spent in the UK?

2. What is the breakdown of this figure by the amount spent in different media?

3. Regarding television advertising, what is the estimated number of viewers that the commercials funded by the Commission will reach, and what is the nature of these commercials?

4. What was the total amount spent by the Commission promoting the EU and its policies in each of the last three years, and what is the breakdown for this amount by Member States and by media?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(4 December 1998)

1. The provisional figures for the 1998 budget total ECU 17,3 million, broken down between Luxembourg, ECU 0,1 million, Ireland, ECU 0,7 million, Austria, Finland, Netherlands, Portugal, ECU 1,0 million, Spain ECU 2,0 million, France, Italy, ECU 3,0 million and Germany, ECU 4,5 million. To this figure can be added the 1997/98 complement of ECU 2,9 million (Belgium, ECU 0,4 million, Netherlands ECU 1,5 million, Spain ECU 1,0 million), making the grand total of ECU 20,2 million to which the Honourable Member refers. These figures represent sums allocated to co-financed joint communication programmes based on conventions signed by the Parliament, the Commission, and the Member States concerned. All Member States were invited to avail themselves of this opportunity. The United Kingdom chose not to, and therefore no proportion of the overall figure will be spent in the United Kingdom.

2. The ECU 20,2 million is combined with national exchequer contributions together amounting to ECU 46,0 million for the joint programmes operated in the eleven Member States. The breakdown of this expenditure is as follows: television and radio, ECU 19,8 million, other actions (brochures, internet sites, exhibitions, etc.), ECU 12,1 million, written press, ECU 7,1 million, information programmes through non governmental organisations, ECU 6,5 million, contribution to national call centres, ECU 5,0 million.

3. No exact figures can yet be given. A full record of estimated viewing figures will be compiled as part of the final activity report to be presented by each participating Member State upon completion of the annual programmes (as foreseen by the conventions). The nature of television activities funded varies considerably, from short "spots" to participation in existing information programmes, to magazine shows, quizzes, infortainment, and so on.

4. Given the decentralised nature of its information activities, the Commission is unable to provide overall statistics of this sort.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3820/98

by Concepció Ferrer (PPE) to the Commission

(22 December 1998)

Subject: Programmes and projects in the field of regional policy in Catalonia

Bearing in mind the policy of transparency pursued by the Commission in relation to its spending, can the Commission say what projects implemented in Catalonia benefitted from each type of aid available in the area of regional policy for the period 1994-1999?

Can the Commission further specify what amounts were finally allocated to each of the above projects?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(18 January 1999)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3237/98

by José Valverde López (PPE) to the Commission

(26 October 1998)

Subject: Availability of Commission documents and of publications of the various services and agencies on the internet

The practice of EU institutions making more and more documents available through the internet has met with wide-spread public approval.

What plans does the Commission have to expand these services in the coming months?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(14 December 1998)

Statistics on the use of the Europa Internet server confirm the widespread public approval of this initiative. In September 1998, for example, almost 7 million Commission documents were consulted, which is more than double the figure for September 1997. Approximately four hits on the the site are from within the Community.

In the coming months the Commission's plans include:

- continuing to develop the server in the eleven official Union languages;

- putting the Europe Direct service into full operation; this should make it easier for private individuals and small and medium-sized businesses to locate information about the Community via the Internet and by means of freephone services;

- incorporating the Eur-Lex service in the Europa structure as a whole (making the Official Journals and current legislation available on-line);

- developing the EURO site;

- opening new sites, together with the Council, dealing with the common foreign and security policy (CFSP) and cooperation in justice and home affairs.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2819/98

by Gianni Tamino (V) to the Commission

(17 September 1998)

Subject: EU-Japan cooperation in seismic engineering

The damage caused recently by earthquakes (Los Angeles, Kobe, Italy, etc.) has underscored the global nature of the problem of protecting structures from earthquakes.

During the visit made by Commissioner Edith Cresson shortly after the Kobe earthquake, the European Union and Japan decided to step up their collaboration in the area of seismic engineering.

On that occasion, an agreement was reached on collaboration between the Japanese Construction Ministry's "Building Research Institute" and the Institute for Systems, Informatics and Safety of the European Union's Joint Research Centre.

Collaboration has continued for three years, and has involved the exchange of information, scientific findings and personnel. Now the need to perform large-scale experiments for the harmonisation of design rules has been recognised.

In view of the damage caused recently by earthquakes, the need to tackle the problem of earthquakes by means of worldwide cooperation, the success of the current EU-Japan cooperation, and the fifth framework programme for research, which points out the strategic importance for the European Union of encouraging cooperation with third countries in the field of research and fostering inventions in order to bolster the EU's international role, can the Commission say whether there are any specific budget lines relating to the implementation of the fifth framework programme for research that ensure that cooperation will continue satisfactorily, or at any rate, how it intends to ensure that EU-Japan cooperation in this area continues?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(26 November 1998)

The problem of the protection of structures from earthquakes is recognised as very important by the Commission, which has funded substantial research within the 4th Research and development (R& D) framework programme.

It is foreseen to continue this support for the next framework programme through the generic activities on natural risks of the specific programme related to the environment. Moreover, as indicated by the Honourable Member, an efficient cooperation with Japan exists presently in this field.

Until now, general scientific and technological cooperation with Japan is financed with the B67211 budget line (international cooperation in the 4th framework programme). The same possibilities will exist in the 5th framework programme with the B66211 budget line.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-3804/98

by Shaun Spiers (PSE) to the Commission

(4 December 1998)

Subject: Multiannual programme for cooperatives, mutuals, associations and foundations

What plans does the Commission have to bring forward programmes to replace the multiannual programme for cooperatives, mutuals, associations and foundations? They are eagerly awaited by social economy organizations.

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission

(12 January 1999)

The Commission is considering a proposal for a multi-annual programme in favour of cooperatives, mutual societies, associations and foundations. This proposal is still subject to further discussion within the Commission. The outcome of the Commission's numerous studies of the sector and its dialogue with representatives of the cooperatives, mutual societies, associations and foundations will be taken into consideration in the final elaboration of the proposal.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1894/98

by Esko Seppänen (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(9 June 1998)

Subject: EU involvement in covert electronic communications interception

The European Parliament's STOA (Scientific and Technological Option Assessment) delegation, which promotes the exploitation of knowledge and research, has commissioned and published a report by Steve Wright, a British researcher for the Omega foundation, on the use of modern technology for political surveillance.

The report mentions a joint surveillance plan between the European Union and the FBI with the aim of tracing (inter alia) international criminals. According to the report, in 1995 the EU countries concluded a secret agreement whereby their undercover services could also send their own code words to the American NSA for the purposes of Echelon electronic precision espionage. Again according to the report, the EU countries might possibly also be required to install the equipment needed for electronic monitoring in all EU telephones.

Has the Commission put into practice the measures mentioned in the STOA report on the standardization of telephones for the purposes of Echelon monitoring, and does it have any information on whether EU countries will be required to use the FBI or NSA electronic communications interception services?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(29 September 1998)

The Commission has noted with interest the interim study: An appraisal of technologies of political control from the scientific and technological options assessment from the Parliament. The Commission is not in possession of any evidence or complaint that a particular Member State is infringing the EC Treaty in this respect.

Nonetheless the Commission remains vigilant to defend Community interests and continues to make efforts to improve the security of its data networks. Furthermore, the Commission condemns all attempts to breach the integrity and confidentiality of information held or transmitted by the institutions.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3058/98

by María Estevan Bolea (PPE) to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Possible failure of various Member States to comply with the Kyoto Protocol on climate change

It was recently reported in the press that France, Germany and the Netherlands will be unable to reach the targets set by the Kyoto Protocol. Both the Member States and the European Community are responsible for reaching those targets.

What is the Commission's standpoint?

Will the Commission take any action on this matter?

In view of this situation, will the Commission amend its proposal to the IVth conference of the parties in Buenos Aires?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(27 November 1998)

The Kyoto Protocol is not yet in force. For it to enter into force, it needs to be ratified by 55 parties, incorporating parties included in annex I which accounted for at least 55 % of the total carbon dioxide emissions for 1990 of the parties included in annex I. In addition, the Community and its Member States have not yet ratified, so the provisions of the Protocol, including its emission reduction targets, are not yet binding upon Member States.

Furthermore, the Commission would underline that the targets laid down in the Kyoto Protocol have to be achieved by parties by the year 2012. Therefore, it considers it premature to take position regarding press articles about possible non-compliance with the targets of the Protocol by certain Member States.

The burden-sharing between Member States agreed by the Council in June 1998 remains unaffected.