ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0258/97 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (7 February 1997)

Subject: Defence closures in South Essex

Is the Commission aware that the forthcoming closure of the Atomic Weapons Establishment at Foulness and of the military barracks at Shoebury, both in my constituency, present a further major challenge to the defence conversion strategy in the area?

Will the Commission ensure that priority is given to allocation of KONVER funds in response to these closures, to assist the workers affected?

Will the Commission ensure that projects developed in response specifically benefit the Southend travel-to-work area, as laid down in the priority areas already agreed?

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

The Commission has not had cause to study the cases to which the Honourable Member refers, but accepts that the closure of these etablishments might constitute a serious problem in the area.

In the Konver II programme agreed with the United Kingdom it is stated that the final distribution of grants will take account of the distribution of relevant job losses within the context of the area strategy. The regional partnership responsible for the implementation of Konver in the United Kingdom should ensure that resources are allocated accordingly, in a manner appropriate to their region. Further resources will become available for the programme to be extended until the end of 1999. Significant defence job losses occurring during the implementation of the programme should entail a review of how these resources are to be allocated. Priority should be given, in particular, to customised human resource development actions for the workers concerned.

The Commission is not responsible for the selection of individual projects. Individual projects are appraised against agreed selection criteria developed by each regional partnership to reflect the objectives of the Konver programme. In principle, this should ensure that projects are focused on the problems faced by workers in the priority areas concerned, including the Southend area. However, the Commission would support initiatives designed to ensure that projects of a sufficient quality come forward from the worst affected areas in the region.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1316/97 by Mark Watts (PSE) to the Commission (11 April 1997)

Subject: European monetary laws

In cases where EU nationals sell property in another Member State but the state retains a proportion of the proceeds against unpaid taxes and in cases where it is confirmed that no taxes are outstanding, what legal redress does the citizen have against the state and/or to ensure a prompt repayment of money due?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (10 June 1997)

The Commission would make the general observation that, since tax administration is a matter for the Member States, a taxpayer challenging the imposition of tax or wishing to obtain a tax refund must avail himself of the relevant means of redress under domestic law.

However, if a particular case is brought to the Honourable Member's attention, the Commission is prepared to investigate provided that the necessary details are sent to it.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1355/97 by Johanna Maij-Weggen (PPE) to the Commission (21 April 1997)

Subject: Implementation of Directive 92/52/EEC and the Council's resolution on the sale of infant formulae in the Third World

Can the Commission confirm that in 1993 the Netherlands asked the Commission about the effect of Directive 92/52/EEC ((OJ L 179, 1.7.1992, p. 129. )) and the relevant Council resolution on the sale of infant formulae in the Third World?

What was the Commission's response to that request, and can the Commission confirm that the Netherlands has now repeated the request?

Is the Commission aware of the critical report by the Interagency Group on Breastfeeding Monitoring which describes the situation concerning the sale of baby food in South Africa, Thailand, Bangladesh and Poland?

Can the Commission state which European companies are criticized in the report for failing to comply with the WHO code on the marketing of breast-milk substitutes?

Can the Commission say whether the firms criticized have complied with Directive 92/52/EEC and the relevant Council resolution?

What is the Commission intending to do to make the European companies in question comply with the international rules on the sales of infant formulae to the Third World?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (29 May 1997)

The Commission can confirm that the Dutch authorities contacted the Commission in 1993 and 1997 concerning the application of Directive 92/52/EEC on infant formulae and follow-on formulae intended for export to third countries ((OJ L 179, 1.7.1992. )). The Commission on both occasions informed the Dutch authorities about the state of affairs.

The Commission is aware of the report to which the Honourable Member refers. The report is available, from the authors, according to the Commission's information, for anybody who should wish to consult it and have any details on its contents.

The Member States, which are responsible for the application of Directive 92/52/EEC, have not informed the Commission of any cases in which Community based companies were not in compliance with this Directive. Further, the Commission has not received any complaint or criticism whatsoever concerning the marketing of breast-milk substitutes by Community based companies from the authorities of third countries which would lead to any action in conformity with the Council Resolution on the marketing of breast-milk substitutes in third countries by Community based manufacturers ((OJ C 172, 8.7.1992. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1436/97 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission (23 April 1997)

Subject: Erasure of 20th century from computer memories

The 'Millenium Bug' is currently causing great concern in the field of information technology since it is threatening to cause a worldwide crash on 1 January 2000, as a result of a total breakdown in computer systems. According to experts this is because computer programmers entered abbreviated forms to save valuable computer memory capacity, so that in entering the year, only 71 would be entered instead of 1971, for example. The problem will occur when on 1 January 2000, computers will think that it is the year 1900, with the result that 30% of them will fail to function at all. The greatest damage however will be caused by those which continue to function using present systems since they will give erroneous readings for every operation or calculation.

1. What steps has the Commission taken with regard to information systems in the Community and in the Member State, as well as in the private sector?

2. Given that the possible solutions to the problem are:

(a) extremely costly, requiring the replacement of computers and their programmes or

(b) very-time consuming, involving the 'correction' of the programming language codes,

who will bear the enormous financial burden which will in either case result, the citizens of the European Union or the companies responsible for the computerization of Community services?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (27 June 1997)

The Commission is aware of this technical problem. As far as the Commission's internal information systems are concerned, appropriate measures have already been taken to inform its services and to identify the necessary adaptations.

Regarding the systems in the national and private sectors, several initiatives to inform economic operators have been actively pursued by suppliers of information systems, by consultants and by some Member States. In the context of this undertaking, the Commission has a forum to share experiences and to make the most appropriate technical solutions commonly known. It also intends to step up information and awareness-raising measures on this subject. The cost of implementing these solutions is the responsibility of the system owners.

Moreover, several technologies to facilitate the adaptation of information systems have been successfully developed under Community research and development programmes. These are currently being used by the largest information system providers.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1438/97 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission (23 April 1997)

Subject: Parallel shipping registry in EU Member States

Certain EU Member States (Denmark, Netherlands, Germany etc.) have introduced parallel shipping registers of freighters and tankers travelling along international routes to destinations outside the sovereignty of the countries whose flags they fly.

Can the Commission say what legal provisions apply at EU level concerning the possibility of parallel shipping registers in all Member States and give a rough idea of what provisions are included in parallel shipping registers set up by certain EU Member States concerning the composition of crews and the financial obligations of shipowners?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission (27 May 1997)

There is no specific legislation at Community level governing the establishment of parallel registers by Member States. However, registers governed by the law of Member States and established on their territories which form part of the Community are subject to Community legislation, in particular where maritime safety is concerned.

There is also no legislation at Community level laying down minimum registration conditions for Member States' ship registers. The advisability of Community legislation laying down minimum registration conditions was discussed in the Commission's maritime strategy document of 13 March 1996 ((SEC(96) 486. )) and is at present being further examined by the Commission.

The Commission does not have an inventory with comprehensive details of Member States' parallel or second registers. It is therefore unable to provide the information requested by the Honourable Member regarding these registers.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1380/97 by Mark Watts (PSE) to the Commission (22 April 1997)

Subject: Occupation of property in the Canary Isles

Is the Commission aware of the situation in the Canary Isles where a local law has been passed to deny owners of property in the Canary Isles the right to allow friends and relations to occupy their property, and that such unauthorized occupation could result in a fine of several thousand pounds?

What action is the Commission taking to prevent such restrictive and unreasonable laws being imposed?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (4 June 1997)

The Honourable Member is doubtless referring to Law No 7/1995 on tourism, which was adopted by the Canary Islands Parliament. The Law is concerned, among other things, with the renting-out of property for tourist purposes, stipulating that such transactions must be conducted through an approved tourist agent. Owners not complying with this requirement could be fined.

An analysis of the provisions of Law No 7/1995 in the light of Articles 52 (freedom of establishment) and 59 (freedom to provide services) of the EC Treaty reveals that they are not discriminatory since they apply both to Spanish owners and to owners from other Member States.

The provisions in question are designed to protect tourists as recipients of services.

The Court of Justice has recognized this objective as an overriding reason relating to the public interest. In the event, given the importance of tourist rentals for the Canary Islands, this objective is backed up by non-excessive measures.

It should though be pointed out that, since the provisions took effect on 20 July 1997, a comprehensive assessment in the light of Articles 52 and 59 will be possible only as of that date.

The Law concerns only the renting-out of property and not the right for owners to allow friends and relations to occupy their property free of charge. Such an arrangement is directly covered by the rules on property ownership, which, in accordance with Article 222 of the EC Treaty, is a matter for the Member States and should be governed by Spanish private law.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1978/97 by Bryan Cassidy (PPE) to the Commission (9 June 1997)

Subject: Members of advisory committees

In Official Journal C 114 of 12 April 1997, the Commission announced the membership of the committees on:

Producers of Fishery Products Fisheries Cooperatives Banks Financing Maritime Activities Specialized Cooperative Credit Institutions Trade in Fishery Products Fishery Industries Workers in the Fishing and Fishery Products Sector Consumers

However, neither the Member State of the members of those committees nor the organizations to which they belong were listed.

Would the Commission kindly provide the missing information?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (25 July 1997)

The Commission is sending the information requested direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0584/97 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Council (25 February 1997)

Subject: Persecution of opposition leaders in Albania

At the instigation of the Albanian Government, the judicial authorities have charged the opposition leaders of the Socialist Party, Retzet Meïdani, the Social Democratic party, Skender Ginoussi, the Democratic Alliance, Arben Imani, and other party leaders with being directly responsible for the violent incidents which followed the collapse of the country's pyramid finance schemes, of which the Albanian Government had been forewarned by the International Monetary Fund.

In view of the flawed nature of the political system in Albania which effectively has no constitution and bearing in mind Parliament's resolutions on human rights in that country and on the release of the Socialist party leader, Fatos Nano - who remains in prison despite international pressure - what practical measures will the Council take to halt this unacceptable persecution by the regime, to secure the release of Fatos Nano and re-establish a democratic constitution and all democratic freedoms in Albania?

Answer (14 July 1997)

The Council welcomes the fact that President Berisha announced a pardon for Mr Fatos Nano on 16 March 1997 following Mr Nano's release from prison along with other prisoners after the Albanian Minister of Justice had ruled that their security could no longer be guaranteed because of the anarchy sweeping the country.

The Council is of the opinion that the formation of a Government of National Reconciliation has paved the way for a return to a functioning democracy and the rule of law in Albania.

The Council is actively engaged in the efforts to help Albania to return to political stability and to prepare fresh elections in June, to restore internal security, as well as to help in providing humanitarian assistance and in working with the international financial institutions on support for wider economic reforms.

These efforts are mainly carried out through the international Advisory Mission in Albania, initiated by the Council and set up within the coordinating framework of the OSCE to advise on humanitarian, economic, political and security related issues. The civilian efforts require constant cooperation and coordination by the international entities, such as the Union, the OSCE and the Council of Europe, which play their part in their respective areas of competence.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1243/97 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission (8 April 1997)

Subject: Inadequate safeguards in the nuclear industry

When subjected to careful scrutiny, the radiological protection afforded to external employees in the nuclear industry, namely auxiliary staff, prompts considerable bewilderment. Medical certificates are written out by qualified personnel who very often change from one year to the next and are input into computer systems only after a long delay, thus preventing a doctor administering treatment from ascertaining the exact quantity of radiation to which an employee in the nuclear industry has been exposed.

Will the Commission issue:

1. a Directive to protect the health of persons working at nuclear installations by prohibiting government authorities from delegating responsibilities for radiation protection to service companies;

2. a Directive whereby the various types of firms authorized to carry out maintenance work in the nuclear industry would have to be entered in special registers?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1243/97 and E-1256/97 given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (16 May 1997)

The fundamental principles governing the operational protection of workers occupationally exposed to ionising radiation are given in Council Directive 96/29/Euratom of 13 March 1996 laying down the basic safety standards in radiological protection of workers and the general public ((OJ L 159, 29. 6. 1996. )).This Directive has to be brought into force before 13 May 2000 and replaces, inter alia, the 80/836/Euratom ((OJ L 246, 17. 9. 1980. )) basic safety standards Directive which still forms the legal basis for the national radiation protection legislation currently in force.

In recognition of the particular situation of occupationally exposed workers not permanently employed by the operator of a nuclear facility, the Council adopted Directive 90/641/Euratom ((OJ L 349, 13.12.1990. )) on the operational radiation protection of outside workers during their activities in controlled areas. The Directive is based on the need to define clearly the obligations of outside undertakings and operators with respect to the specific working conditions of outside workers, without prejudice to the contribution they themselves have to make to their own protection.

Both the basic safety standards Directive and the complementary Directive on outside workers oblige the Member States to establish adequate radiological monitoring systems including individual medical and dose records.

The Commission has taken many initiatives and will continue to make all possible efforts in supporting and assisting the Member States in the practical implementation of the respective requirements in order to assure best radiation protection for all occupational exposed workers to ionizing radiation.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1854/97 by Joaquín Sisó Cruellas (PPE) to the Commission (30 May 1997)

Subject: Subsidy for the Instituto Ramón J. Sender, Fraga, Spain

On 30 October 1996 the Instituto de Educación Secundaria y Bachillerato Ramón J. Sender, in Fraga, Aragon, Spain, submitted an application to the European Union under the Socrates pogramme (subprogamme Lingua, Action E - joint educational projects for language learning). The aim of the application was to obtain financial assistance to enable an exchange to take place with the Instituto Fabio Besta in Ragusa, Sicily, Italy, as the two establishments are working on a historical research project, entitled 'Vestiges of the Crown of Aragon in the County of Modica, Sicily', to investigate the links and linguistic, cultural and historical ties between Aragon, Catalonia and Sicily which are due to the fact that they all belonged to the Crown of Aragon. The pupils of the school in Fraga had planned to make their trip in April, following the visit of the Italians pupils to their town in March, but have not received the requested subsidy and have been obliged to postpone it. This has aroused indignation, as the Italian school did receive a subsidy for the same project.

Why has the Instituto Fabio Besta been granted a subsidy but not the Instituto de Educación Secundaria y Bachillerato Ramón J. Sender, when both are working on the same project?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (25 June 1997)

Lingua action E (joint educational projects for language learning) of the Socrates programme is a decentralised action. Decisions regarding allocations of grants are taken by the national agencies appointed in the Member States, within the available budget. The selection criteria are laid down at a European level, and they may be complemented by national priorities.

In this particular case, at the time of the selection concerned, the Spanish national agency could only accept 79 projects with the available budget, and was obliged to put 59 on a reserve list.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1526/97 by Johanna Maij-Weggen (PPE) to the Commission (5 May 1997)

Subject: Wolves in northern Italy

Can the Commission confirm that, at the European Union's expense, wolves in the northern Italian region of Emilia Romagna are given live sheep and/or lambs to hunt with the aim of stimulating their hunting instinct (Eindhovens Dagblad, 29 March 1997)?

Can the Commission confirm that 320 000 Dutch guilders has been set aside for this supply of food?

Can the Commission say what European objective benefits from this subsidy and from which of the Union's budget headings it is derived?

Can the Commission say whether these are natural packs of wolves or wolves that have been especially released, and can it say whether it has anything to do with their release?

Does the Commission not find this an extremely cruel practice that has nothing to do with nature, and does it not consider it better for these wolves to be allowed to find food for themselves or for the packs to be moved to a place where they can hunt in a natural way?

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

The LIFE-Nature project 'Azioni di conservazione del lupo in sei siti S.I.C. del Parco Regionale dell'Alto Appennino Reggiano' has been financed in 1996. It aims at the protection of the wolf, a priority species listed in Annex I of Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora ((OJ L 206, 22.7.1992. )).

The project has been presented by the local park authority, under the supervision of the regional government of Emilia-Romagna, Department for the environment. The Department helps to finance the project.

The project has been put in place by the local authorities to test a new compensatory scheme, that should enable a quicker intervention and a higher level of participation of the local breeders in the park area. The action foresees the purchase of live sheep and lambs to be used as direct compensation for any loss of animals suffered by local breeders because of damage caused by wolves in the park area. The sheep and lambs purchased will be in custody of local breeders and will be used when compensation is needed. The substitute animals will certainly not be released into the wild as bait but, will be integrated in the breeder's herd.

Concerning the financial aspect, some 10 000 Ecu have been committed to the action described above. Only 45 % of this amount is covered by Community funding.

The project is financed in the framework of the Life Regulation (Council Regulation 1973/92 as modified by Council Regulation 1404/96 ((OJ L 181, 20.7.1996 and OJ L 206, 22.7.1992. ))). The amount is committed under budgetary item B4-3200.

The most recent data indicates that 10-35 wolves live in the park in five packs of 2-7 wolves each and the population trend appears to be stable. No individual has been especially released.

Considering the experimental character of the action, the Commission will carefully monitor its results.