ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1618/98 by Ernesto Caccavale (UPE) to the Commission (11 May 1998)

Subject: Aid to the parts of Campania hit by floods

A catastrophic flood hit parts of the Campania region a few days ago, causing an emergency with disastrous effects - whole villages were completely cut off or were overwhelmed by a sea of mud and debris and mountain landslides on an enormous scale submerged houses and roads. Thousands of people were made homeless, a substantial number of people were killed and many others are missing. Furthermore, the civil protection services, which are on high alert, have reported that in some areas vital services such as water, electric light and gas have been suspended.

In view of the exceptionally serious situation and the fact that the tragedy was predictable and inevitable, in that the affected areas are very built-up, but were at high risk as far as ground water was concerned, can the Commission:

1. send immediate aid to the people hit by what is a veritable natural calamity;

2. say whether it considers it necessary to check up on the administration of regional planning policies and possibly adopt measures to monitor situations where there is a threat of landslides and reckless unauthorized property development has been carried out?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (12 June 1998)

The Honourable Member referred to the answer given by the Commission to urgent resolutions on 14 May 1998, which is being sent direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.

Among other things, the Commission said that there is no longer a budget heading for emergency aid. On the monitoring of regional policy, the Commission said that the Member States were trying to establish the principles of Community-level regional policy on the basis of an intergovernmental agreement.

As far as civil protection actions are concerned, the Commission does not have operational responsibilities but takes measures only in accordance with the subsidiarity principle. In the context of the implementation of Council Decision 98/22/EC of 19 December 1997, establishing a Community action programme in the field of civil protection, ((OJ L 8, 14.1.1998. )) the priorities of this programme have been agreed with the Member States and will cover amongst other initiatives the following:

- a major project in the field of the prevention of disasters which is particularly important for hydrogeological risks,

- a process for improving crisis management aiming to increase the efficiency of interventions in case of disaster,

- a global system for the information to the public, with a view to improving the self protection and awareness of citizens in particular in areas prone to specific risks.

In addition, a resolution of the Council of July 1991 ((OJ C 198, 27.7.1991. )) stresses the necessity, in case of emergencies, to improve mutual assistance between Member States. In this perspective, the Commission has already developed important work in this context including a system of sending, upon request, experts to a Member State, and an operational manual for civil protection in the Community.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0993/98 by Freddy Blak (PSE) to the Commission (2 April 1998)

Subject: Free movement of labour

1. People with national register addresses in Denmark are not (except in very special circumstances) allowed to travel for commercial purposes within the country's borders in cars registered in other Member States. This also applies even though the person in question is employed by a foreign company and only a small proportion of the work is carried out in Denmark. Does this apply only to Denmark, or is it common to the Member States?

2. Does the Commission consider this state of affairs to be compatible with the principle of the free movement of labour? Why/why not?

3. Does the Commission consider this situation to be desirable? Why/why not?

4. Does the Commission intend to remedy this situation so that it becomes more attractive for EU citizens to seek employment in another Member State?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (19 May 1998)

According to Danish legislation, individuals and companies resident or domiciled in Denmark should have their cars registered in Denmark. Although exceptions are allowed in certain circumstances, these are not of great benefit to cross-border workers residing in Denmark and employed in a neighbouring Member State. In fact, the use of company cars registered in the Member State where the employer is situated, and placed at the disposal of cross-border workers is subject to severe restrictions. The Danish authorities allow the use of company cars for direct travel between the workers' residence and the border only during weekends, primarily for test drives. Cross-border workers are not allowed to use company cars for private purposes.

The Commission considers these provisions in breach of Community law on free movement of workers and on cross-border provision of services (Articles 48 and 59 of the EC Treaty respectively), for the following reasons.

Workers residing in Denmark are hindered in taking a job across the border, which would require them to drive a company car for work purposes on both sides of the border. Moreover, considering that the use of a company car, even for private purposes, is in many cases a normal part of remuneration, cross-border workers are not able to enjoy the full (non-pecuniary) advantages granted by their employer.

Firms in Member States bordering Denmark are dissuaded from hiring workers resident in Denmark, since the latter cannot legally drive company cars, registered in these Member States, for professional purposes in Denmark. Companies are thus restricted in their choice of employees as well as in the cross-border provision of services through their employees who are resident in Denmark.

The Commission has become aware of this situation through a number of complaints of citizens of the Community resident in Denmark. After having examined the case thoroughly, it started infringement proceedings against Denmark on the basis of Article 169 of the EC Treaty. The Commission has decided recently to send a reasoned opinion to Denmark.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0636/98 by Jorge Hernandez Mollar (PPE) to the Commission (9 March 1998)

Subject: Conditions for upgrading the Spanish 'Ingeniero Técnico' engineering qualification in comparison with others

Which does the Commission consider the highest education qualification in Germany: the 'Fachhochschuldiplom', or the 'Hochschuldiplom' (university-level degree)?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0635/98, E-0636/98, E-0637/98, E-0638/98, E-0639/98, E-0640/98, E-0641/98, E-0642/98, E-0643/98, E-0644/98, E-0645/98, E-0669/98, E-0670/98, E-0671/98, E-0672/98, E-0673/98, E-0674/98, E-0675/98, E-0676/98, E-0677/98, E-0678/98, E-0679/98, E-0724/98, E-0725/98, E-0726/98, E-0727/98 and E-0728/98 given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (21 April 1998)

The Commission feels that most of the information requested by the Honourable Member is contained in its answers to written questions E-2749/97 by Ms Garcia Arias ((OJ C 82, 17.3.1998. )) and E-4186/97 by Ms Dührkop Dührkop ((OJ C 304, 2.10.1998, p. 15. )). The Commission would accordingly refer the Honourable Member to these answers, where it gave a full statement of its general approach to qualifications giving access to A/LA posts in the European public service and more specifically to qualifications held by Spanish technical engineers.

The correct translation of 'diploma universitario' into German is 'abgeschlossenes Hochschulstudium', and that is the term used on the notice of competition COM/A/1047 (97/C 145 A/02) published in the Official Journal. With regard to Competition COM/A/720 and COM/A/821, the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the judgment given on 3 March 1994 by the Court of First Instance in Case T-82/92 Cortés Jiménez v Commission.

The Commission would draw the attention of the Honourable Member to the fact that the candidate at competition COM/A/104 has brought an action, registered at the Registry of the Court of First Instance under number T-299/97 on 1 December 1997. Accordingly the Commission cannot give an answer because the matter is sub judice.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1153/98 by José Apolinário (PSE) to the Commission (24 April 1998)

Subject: Value of Lisbon and Tagus Valley (Portugal) GDP

According to the most recent Eurostat statistics the Lisbon and Tagus Valley region has a per capita GDP which exceeds 75% of the Community average, for which reason it will not in future be eligible for Structural Fund Objective 1 status.

However, in view of the range and diversity of the socio-economic conditions within the Lisbon and Tagus Valley geographical area, does the Commission not think that (to follow the example of what it said in its answer to Written Question P-2010/97 ((OJ C 45, 10.2.1998, p. 142 )) concerning the GDP variations in Andalusia) it should undertake a more detailed geographical analysis of the vast area which the Lisbon and Tagus Valley region encompasses? And could a more detailed analysis of this kind not be carried out by means of a subdivision at NUTS 3 level (as undertaken by the Commission in its answer to the above question)?

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission (4 June 1998)

Eligibility for Structural Fund Objective 1 status is laid down at level 2 of the Nomenclature of Territorial Statistical Units (NUTS). This objective is aimed at making up the economic shortfall and must therefore be assessed at the level of geographic units which are large enough for implementation of a regional development policy.

Even if there are differences in the situations within the Lisbon and Tagus Valley region, the data at NUTS 3 level must be treated with caution in view of the small size of the geographic units concerned and the methodological difficulties posed by commuters when it comes to estimating the GDP per inhabitant. The GDP is estimated on the basis of the place of production, while the population is that of the place of residence. This automatically increases the GDP per inhabitant in the areas in which employment is concentrated (Greater Lisbon in the present case) and reduces it in the areas in which the employees live. The scale of this problem diminishes with the size of the region and is thus much less critical at NUTS 2 level.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0640/98 by Jorge Hernandez Mollar (PPE) to the Commission (9 March 1998)

Subject: Conditions for upgrading the Spanish 'Ingeniero Técnico' engineering qualification in comparison with others

Is it true that the Commission has expressed its concern to the Spanish authorities that making holders of the Spanish 'Ingeniero Técnico' qualification eligible for A/LA category posts will mean having to do the same for holders of qualifications obtained from three-year courses in other Member States? Does that justify rejecting applications from holders of the Spanish 'Ingeniero Técnico' qualification?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0635/98, E-0636/98, E-0637/98, E-0638/98, E-0639/98, E-0640/98, E-0641/98, E-0642/98, E-0643/98, E-0644/98, E-0645/98, E-0669/98, E-0670/98, E-0671/98, E-0672/98, E-0673/98, E-0674/98, E-0675/98, E-0676/98, E-0677/98, E-0678/98, E-0679/98, E-0724/98, E-0725/98, E-0726/98, E-0727/98 and E-0728/98 given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (21 April 1998)

The Commission feels that most of the information requested by the Honourable Member is contained in its answers to written questions E-2749/97 by Ms Garcia Arias ((OJ C 82, 17.3.1998. )) and E-4186/97 by Ms Dührkop Dührkop ((OJ C 304, 2.10.1998, p. 15. )). The Commission would accordingly refer the Honourable Member to these answers, where it gave a full statement of its general approach to qualifications giving access to A/LA posts in the European public service and more specifically to qualifications held by Spanish technical engineers.

The correct translation of 'diploma universitario' into German is 'abgeschlossenes Hochschulstudium', and that is the term used on the notice of competition COM/A/1047 (97/C 145 A/02) published in the Official Journal. With regard to Competition COM/A/720 and COM/A/821, the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the judgment given on 3 March 1994 by the Court of First Instance in Case T-82/92 Cortés Jiménez v Commission.

The Commission would draw the attention of the Honourable Member to the fact that the candidate at competition COM/A/104 has brought an action, registered at the Registry of the Court of First Instance under number T-299/97 on 1 December 1997. Accordingly the Commission cannot give an answer because the matter is sub judice.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1227/98 by Marie-Paule Kestelijn-Sierens (ELDR) to the Commission (29 April 1998)

Subject: Health impact of kerosene

Does the Commission have accurate data on the harmful effect of kerosene? If so, to what extent is it harmful? Is it true that kerosene, one ingredient of which is benzene, may cause leukaemia and cancer of the respiratory tract? Is the data which the Commission possesses in this connection generally available?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (22 June 1998)

The Iuclid database of the Commission contains toxicological data on kerosene and these data are available to the public.

Kerosene, a petroleum fraction with benzene as one of its components (less than 5%), has until now not been classified as to its carcinogenicity to humans ('Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans', International agency for research on cancer). There is limited evidence for the carcinogenicity in experimental animals (e.g. skin tumours in mice). Recent epidemiological studies on the potential carcinogenic effects of kerosene (e.g. lung cancer) did not provide conclusive results.

The programme on biomedical and health research (Biomed 2) is supporting a project on 'Exposure to low levels of benzene, interindividual biological variability and cancer risks', which is coordinated by the National Cancer Research Institute in Genoa and will provide results in 2001.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1407/98 by Maren Günther (PPE) to the Commission (11 May 1998)

Subject: EU research aid for Upper Bavaria in general and for the Munich Technical University in particular

Would the Commission kindly answer the following questions concerning EU research aid for Upper Bavaria:

1. What was the total amount of R& D aid for Upper Bavaria in 1997?

2. How was the aid allocated among the various contractors (large industrial undertakings and their research institutes, SMUs, Munich University, independent research institutes, etc.)?

3. What aid was allocated to the research institutes of the Munich Technical University (MTU) in Garching? What amounts were allocated to what institutes within the MTU?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (15 July 1998)

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.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1146/98 by Hilde Hawlicek (PSE) to the Commission (24 April 1998)

Subject: Equality of opportunity in the admission of Austrian interpreters and translators to the European Union's language service

In the Austrian Treaty on Accession, Protocol No 10 'on the use of specific Austrian terms of the German language in the framework of the European Union' recognized the existence of Austrian variants in the German language. However this recognition is restricted to 23 terms which mainly relate to the food sector and the Austrian terms in other specialist areas, in particular the legal sector, are ignored.

In June 1995 the Council adopted a resolution on languages in the European Union. It referred to the maintenance of the linguistic diversity in the European Union and, in relation to subsidiarity, to the promotion of multilingualism with equal respect for the languages of the Union.

However sufficient account has not yet been taken of the fact that, with Austria's accession to the European Union, there are now two variants of German being used.

Because of the current legal situation the use of Austrian terms is not permitted in EU selection procedure for Austrian translators and interpreters and such terms are therefore marked as mistakes in the admission tests. As this constitutes a serious competitive disadvantage for Austrian applicants, the Commission is asked:

How does it intend to establish equality of opportunity for German and Austrian translators and interpreters for admission to the European Union's language service?

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

In competitions for German-speaking translators of Austrian nationality which the Commission organised with other Community institutions in 1996/97 (EUR/LA99 and 100), the use of Austrian terms was neither ruled out nor penalised. The reserve lists drawn up following these competitions included 22 successful candidates in all. Successful candidates have been and will be recruited as posts become vacant.

Following accession by Austria and in preparation for the forthcoming Austrian Presidency, the Commission's Joint Interpreting and Conference Service, which is aware of the Austrian variant of the German language, has been working with the Austrian authorities to organise language enrichment visits to Vienna and Graz in May and July 1997 and March and April 1998; interpreters whose language combinations include German enjoyed the opportunity to familiarise themselves with the specific terms of this variant of German, particularly in the legal, economic, administrative, financial and banking fields or to study or perfect their knowledge of them.

In its competitions and admission tests, the Commission does not regard the use of 'Austrian terms' as a mistake and will continue to ensure equal treatment for German-speaking translators and interpreters irrespective of their nationality.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2176/98 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (10 July 1998)

Subject: Report on quality control of 2nd CSF projects

The report drawn up following the quality control of projects carried out under the 2nd CSF concludes that nearly half of the regional development projects jointly funded by the EU are technically deficient and will have to be rectified or even redone because they were carried out on the basis of faulty studies or using sub-standard materials or do not comply with the stipulations of the contract.

The report states that sample quality controls of materials revealed that about 50% of contractors had not complied with specifications. This applied to all materials except asphalt, for which the figure rose to around 70%.

Is this information correct and what does the Commission intend to do to ensure that measures are taken at government level to compel the contractors responsible to carry out the necessary alterations or the entire project again in order to comply with their contractual obligations, wherever these have been breached?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (17 July 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.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0943/98 by Allan Macartney (ARE) to the Commission (30 March 1998)

Subject: Dissemination of experience between funding partnerships

What steps are being taken to ensure that those bodies dealing with programmes involving aid from the ERDF, the ESF and the EAGGF provide partnerships with information regarding best practice which is based on their experience across programmes and Member States?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (14 May 1998)

The beneficiaries of the structural funds in the Member States have no formal duty to transfer experience to other beneficiaries. However, many of them have an interest in knowing best practices in other Member States. The Commission encourages this exchange of experience and ensures a wide range of information activities. Many documents, analyses and reports are published every year on paper and on Internet. Many seminars and conferences are held at the initiative of the Commission, either on thematic issues (e.g. equal opportunities, environment, evaluation) or between those having common interests (e.g. objective 1 regions, social partners). Finally, encouraged by the Commission, the Member States and regions use the technical assistance allocations in the programmes in order to exchange experience with other beneficiaries of the structural funds.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0965/98 by Markus Ferber (PPE) to the Commission (30 March 1998)

Subject: Electronic debiting system for Eco-points

1. The windscreen of a lorry was damaged as a faulty Eco-point meter was being removed. Who is liable for compensation to the haulier?

2. What happens if a driver wishing to make only a bilateral trip, forgets to press the appropriate button on the meter, so that points are needlessly debited? Can they be restored?

3. How flexibly can the state of an Eco-point account be read? Can hauliers call up the current state of their Eco-point accounts on a daily basis, and check whether the correct number of Eco-points has been debited?

4. Why does the Eco-point meter have to be fixed to the windscreen? Could it not rather be sealed to the vehicle and fitted to another vehicle when appropriate?

5. Will the spot checks on the Eco-point system, especially in the transitional phase, be conducted in the pettifogging manner customary for such checks in Austria?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission (15 May 1998)

1. The Commission has not been informed of any incident where the windscreen of a lorry has been damaged by an ecotag.

2. A driver making a bilateral journey to or from Austria who forgets to select the 'bilateral' mode on the ecotag (and thus leaves it in 'transit' mode) will have ecopoints deleted from the account of the operator since the system will register the lorry as making a transit journey.

If there are no ecopoints in the account of the operator then the lorry would be stopped by the control authorities, as it will be designated as a lorry transiting Austria without paying ecopoints. Under such circumstances the Commission would expect the driver not to be fined if he can prove to the satisfaction of the control authority that a bilateral journey is being undertaken.

3. The electronic ecopoint system enables information on the use of ecopoints to be updated every 24 hours.

4. The ecotag is mounted on the windscreen to enable it to be read by roadside scanner and to allow the drivers to set its mode. Its mounting is permanent since each ecotag is unique to each lorry.

5. The Commission expects the Austrian authorities to have sufficient mobile controls to deter those wishing to transit Austria without paying ecopoints. The Commission is confident that such controls will not be carried out in a discriminatory way.