ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0561/96 by Mary Banotti (PPE) to the Commission (11 March 1996)

Subject: Public relations activities

For each of the last five years how many Restricted Offers for public relations programmes were sought for work to be carried out other than in Brussels?

Also, for each of the last 5 years:

1. How many tenders were sought:

- as restricted offers?

- as unrestricted offers?

2. How many resulted in a contract for supply of public relations services (i.e. not goods)?

3. How many contracts were awarded to the same body corporate?

Supplementary answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (12 June 1996)

Further to its previous answer, the Commission would inform the Honourable Member that it awarded the following contracts in the field of public relations for activities to be carried out elsewhere than in Brussels:

- 1991: six contracts following a restricted procedure and no contract following an open procedure,

- 1992: one contract following a restricted procedure and no contract following an open procedure,

- 1993: four contracts following a restricted procedure and twelve contracts following an open procedure,

- 1994: seven contracts following a restricted procedure and four contracts following an open procedure,

- 1995: forty contracts following a restricted procedure and six contracts following an open procedure.

These eighty procedures all led to contracts for public relations services.

Between 1991 and 1995, ten bodies were each awarded two contracts.

A table detailing all these procedures and their outcome will be sent direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0440/96 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission (29 February 1996)

Subject: Community aid for areas of Piedmont affected by flooding

Bearing in mind that the Community has provided financial aid through the EIB to the areas of Piedmont affected by flooding in November 1994;

- Having regard to the author's previous questions on this subject;

- Noting that in the commune of S. Stefano Belbo, for example, no work has yet started on restoring the water courses, safeguarding riverside buildings or repairing the effects of landslides;

Will the Commission:

1. Provide a list of the communes which have received aid;

2. Say how this aid has been used;

3 Say who is responsible for any failure to use funds or any serious delays in their use?

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission (2 April 1996)

The European investment bank (EIB), the long term Community financing institution, provides loans for capital investment projects that support Community policy objectives. On 8th May 1995, the EIB signed the first tranche (ITL 600 000 million) of an approved ITL 1 200 000 million global loan with four banks, namely IMI, Banca mediocredito, Crediop and Banca nazionale del lavoro for the rehabilitation of infrastructure and production facilities damaged by the 1994 floods in Northern Italy.

This EIB global loan finances investment supporting reconstruction in flooded areas under the provisions of Articles 2 and 8 (enterprises, including small and medium sized enterprises) of Italian Law 35/95. The EIB is therefore not involved in the financing of infrastructure of local and regional interest under the provision of Article 6 (Law 35/95), which concerns the local authorities financed through the Cassa dei depositi e prestiti.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1221/96 by Martina Gredler (ELDR) to the Commission (23 May 1996)

Subject: Low-allergen latex

Latex can trigger serious allergies. A reduction in the allergenic properties of latex would be an important step forward, since latex products are frequently used in medicine. At present, neither ambulances nor hospitals are normally equipped with latex-free emergency equipment.

Have any investigations been carried out into the incidence of latex allergies in the Member States?

Have there been any investigations into the cost of treating latex allergies in the Member States?

Does the Commission intend to draw up a proposal for a regulation to ensure the development of low-allergen latex?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (12 July 1996)

The Commission has become aware of this type of problem and is working on the subject of bio-compatibility with the European Committee for Standardisation and experts on standardising. This work is being undertaken in two different directions:

* establishing harmonised European standards on bio-compatibility. This area also covers allergic reactions. Some of these standards concerning bio-compatibility in general are already approved and support the application of directives on the general mechanisms;

* allergic reactions specifically caused by latex. A proposal has been made to undertake co-normative and pre-normative research in order to devise a methodology for studying the allergenic effects of latex and other materials used in similar fields. These studies are the subject of the STAR programme.

The Commission does not possess data or carry out research on the prevalence and treatment of allergies caused by latex in the Member States. It does not intend to propose any regulations on this subject.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1339/96 by José Barros Moura (PSE) to the Commission (3 June 1996)

Subject: Structural Funds and employment

When they held their informal meeting in Venice, the Ministers responsible for regional policy and regional planning agreed that the Commission and the Member States would cooperate even more closely in implementing assistance under the Structural Funds. After the conclusions were announced, Mrs Wulf-Mathies, a Member of the Commission, said that it would be important to ensure that job creation measures were eligible to benefit under the Funds.

By what means will such eligibility be 'ensured'? How will the measures in question tie in with Objective 1?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (27 June 1996)

The Honourable Member is asked to refer to the communication from the Commission 'Community Structural Assistance and Employment'. ((Doc. COM(96)109 final. )) This paper, forwarded to the Council and Parliament on 29 March 1996, specifies the Commission guidelines on assistance for job creation measures under the Structural Funds. It also analyses in detail the specific context of Objective 1 with reference to measures of this type.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0696/96 by Yannos Kranidiotis (PSE) to the Council (27 March 1996)

Subject: The situation on Imbros and Tenedos

On 24 July 1923 Imbros and Tenedos, two islands in the north-east Aegean with majority Greek populations were awarded to Turkey by the Treaty of Lausanne. Articles 14, 38 and 42 of that Treaty provided, inter alia, special self-governing status for the islands and guaranteed their Greek inhabitants safeguards of life and property, the freedom to use their language and religious freedom.

Turkey has never respected those articles. On the contrary, it has systematically violated them, creating inhuman living conditions for the Greek population. From 1964 onwards the Turkish authorities, as part of their policy of ethnic cleansing, closed the Greek schools, desecrated the churches and seized 90% of the agricultural land to set up prison farms and barracks. The result of Turkey's consistent policy has been that there are now no more than 300 Greek inhabitants of Imbros, as against the 7 000 who lived there in 1964.

The EU has of course signed a customs union agreement with Turkey, the provisions of which include an obligation to respect human rights, minority rights and international law. What action does the Council intend to take to remedy this appalling situation and to have the minority rights of Greeks on Imbros and Tenedos respected, in the context of the forthcoming EU-Turkey Association Council?

Reply (7 August 1996)

The Council has no knowledge of the events to which the Honourable Member refers.

As it has already stressed many times, the Council attaches particular importance to respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms in its relations with non-member countries. In its contacts with the Turkish authorities, whether in the Association Council or in less formal surroundings, the European Union takes every opportunity to reiterate that respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms is at the basis of closer ties between Turkey and the European Union and a key factor in the process of creating those ties.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1598/96 by José Apolinário (PSE) to the Commission (24 June 1996)

Subject: Court of Auditors' Special Report No 4/95

In connection with point 5.4 of the Commission's reply to the Court of Auditors' Special Report No 4/95 ((OJ C 345, 22.12.1995, p. 1. )), what has the Commission done, or what is it intending to do, in order to comply?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (11 July 1996)

The Commission, in partnership with the Member State concerned, is currently considering the various possibilities of following up the conclusions of the Court of Auditors' report.

With this in mind, at the meeting of the monitoring committee of the subprogramme Agriculture held in Lisbon on 11 June 1996, the Commission approached the Portuguese authorities to discuss the most adequate means to eliminate the bottlenecks identified by the Court, which affect the development of agriculture in Portugal, in particular those in connection with the marketing of agricultural products.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1976/96 by Maren Günther (PPE) to the Commission (12 July 1996)

Subject: Flow of information on funding from ECHO to NGOs in all Member States

When ECHO decides to make funds available in emergencies to NGOs for humanitarian actions, this information often does not reach NGOs in outlying Member States. As a result, the NGOs concerned are clearly under represented in EC humanitarian aid contracts.

What practical steps will the Commission be taking to ensure the reliable and rapid provision of information immediately following funding decisions, particularly to NGOs in outlying Member States, so that the latter are not disadvantaged by their geographical situation and have the same opportunity to submit applications as NGOs represented in or around Belgium?

Answer given by Ms Bonino on behalf of the Commission (31 July 1996)

In recent years the Commission has tried to broaden its network of partners to include NGOs from all Member States.

To this end, working and information meetings have been held in a number of Member States to provide details of the Commission's procedures. In addition, and there are now far more ways for these organizations to join forces with the Commission to carry out humanitarian operations. To date, over 170 framework partnership contracts have been concluded with NGOs and other bodies, many of them from the new Member States.

However, activities must be grounded in the principles set out in Council Regulation No 1257/96 on humanitarian aid. ((OJ L 163, 2 July 1996. )) Articles 1 and 2, in particular, set out the goals of such aid. These are to save and protect lives and bring relief to people affected by crisis in instances where local authorities cannot do the job themselves or do not even exist. In addition, Article 7(2) of the Regulation lays down the eligibility criteria for NGOs.

As was pointed out in response to the Honourable Member's oral question, H-376/96, asked at question time during last June's part-session, ((Parliament debate (June 1996). )) this means that the Commission tries to seek out those partners best able to meet the vital needs of victims of natural or man-made disasters.

The Commission will continue to help involve NGOs from countries which do not have a long tradition of humanitarian assistance and therefore lack experience. The inclusion of NGOs in structures such as those offered by 'Voice' could prove useful. Another solution is to draw on the opportunities the Regulation provides for exchanges of technical and other knowledge between European humanitarian aid bodies or between them and their representative bodies.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1102/96 by Angela Sierra González (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (25 April 1996)

Subject: Building of Gomera airport

How does the Commission assess the investments made with Community funds (more than ECU 27 million from the ERDF) in the various projects carried out on the island of Gomera, Canary Islands, Spain?

Does the Commission consider that the various transport infrastructure projects (construction of the island's airport, building of new roads, projects to create harbour areas, etc.) will improve its overall development and take account of environmental protection?

What is the Commission's view of the Court of Auditors' report for 1994, which gives a detailed description of the irregularities committed in the implementation of the various infrastructure projects launched on the island of Gomera?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (28 May 1996)

In the 1989-93 programming period, Structural Funds part-financed a number of operations on the island of Gomera under the Objective 1 Community support framework for Spain.

Among these operations was one intended solely and specifically for the island - the Gomera integrated operational programme (IOP) - which was the only operation referred to in points 4.33 and 4.34 of the Court of Auditors' report to which the Honourable Member refers.

Adopting the Gomera IOP on 30 July 1990, the Commission granted ECU 47.175 million (at 1989 prices) in Community aid, comprising ECU 38.847 million from the European Regional Development Fund, ECU 2.562 million from the European Social Fund and ECU 5.766 million from the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund, of the ECU 95.025 million total investment.

Although the IOP already appears promising in some respects, we must await the final report for an objective judgment of the real impact of the programme overall and of the projects part-financed in connection with other operations.

The Commission considers that the development strategies identified for the island's transport infrastructure will generally contribute to its integrated development.

However, Gomera's ecology and mountainous topography mean that any road and airport infrastructure project there is bound to have repercussions on the environment. Over the course of 1989-93 programming period, therefore, the Government of the Canary Islands decided, following comments by the Commission, to take all requisite measures to minimize environmental impact and to repair any damage that might be caused in the process of implementing the various projects.

For the period 1994-99, the Objective 1 Community support framework for Spain of which Structural Fund aid to the Canary Islands forms a part clearly states the rules that the Member State must obey so as to comply with environmental and other Community legislation.

The Commission would ask the Honourable Member to refer to its detailed response to the Court of Auditors' comments. ((OJ C 303, 14.11.1995. ))
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1717/96 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission (25 June 1996)

Subject: Violations of press freedom in Croatia

One of the conditions for the granting of PHARE appropriations to any country is known to be freedom of the press.

In Croatia, however, the press is being continually muzzled, as indicated in the European Parliament resolution of 6 June 1996 ((Minutes of 6 June 1996, p. 41. )).

In view of this, will the Commission suspend payments of PHARE aid to Croatia or will it continue them, thereby failing to observe the rules of law which govern the EU?

Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (16 July 1996)

The Commission would point out to the Honourable Member that Croatia has received no assistance under PHARE.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0748/96 by Magda Aelvoet (V) to the Commission (26 March 1996)

Subject: European support for Norwegian research into enriching certain coastal regions with phosphates

It was decided at the North Sea Conference in 1987 that the volume of fertilizers discharged into the North Sea had to be reduced drastically in order to restore the biological balance of the North sea and to protect the variety of species. The drastic decrease in nutrients has in fact resulted in a slow but sure reduction in pollution.

Nevertheless, the Commission has adopted a diametrically opposed position in that it is giving a Norwegian research project BF 80 million to enrich certain coastal regions with phosphates in order to increase fish production, because the Norwegians believe that this research could have a significant impact on world food supplies.

1. Has an agreement been reached with North Sea ministers concerning this support? If so, what agreement?

2. How does the Commission justify this support in the light of the efforts to achieve a biological balance in the North Sea?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (22 May 1996)

The project 'Comparative analysis of food webs based on flow networks: Effects of nutrient supply on structure and function of coastal plankton communities (COMWEB)' is funded in the context of the marine science and technology programme (Mast). The project comprises 7 partners from 5 European countries (Belgium, Germany, Spain, Finland and Norway) which receive a total funding of 1.85 MECU over three years. The 3 Norwegian partners receive together 23% of these funds. Under the EEE agreement, Norway participates in the fourth Framework programme and its implementing specific research programmes. The research project was evaluated and selected for funding according to the existing procedures and received a favourable opinion from the Mast programme committee. The Community funds up to 50 % of the cost of the project and the complementary sums are found from national resources.

Comweb is an interdisciplinary strategic research project which focuses on the complex interactions in coastal ecosystems. Its main objective is to develop efficient analytical, numerical and experimental methods needed for decisions to be taken in the next decades whether enhancement of marine production is possible, feasible and acceptable from an environmental point of view. It is therefore a project that will lead to a better understanding of the role of nutrients in marine ecosystems. Most of the project work is carried out in laboratory experiments. The field experiment involves a very limited release of nutrients to coastal waters which is insignificant compared to the constant input through rivers and run-off. It is fully controlled by the national authorities and will be preceded by a risk assessment.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1601/96 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (24 June 1996)

Subject: Development aid in South America

Could the Commission identify documentation available in English relating to EU National Indicative Programmes and evaluation studies of EU development aid projects in each of Venezuela, Colombia and Peru, and state precisely the appropriate reference numbers or Commission officials so that these can be made available to the European Parliament?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission (15 July 1996)

The Commission does not draw up annual indicative programmes for its aid to Latin American countries.

Most of the documents referred to by the Hon. Member, particularly project identification reports, are available only in Spanish, the working language used with the authorities of the countries concerned.

The Commission does provide translations - including English translations - of the financing proposals for projects submitted to the ALA Committee for approval.

The Commission will of course be delighted to provide any non-confidential information at its disposal: requests for documentation should be addressed to the appropriate Directorate-General.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1405/96 by Laura De Esteban Martin (PPE) to the Commission (6 June 1996)

Subject: Euro-Mediterranean Conference in Barcelona

Could the Commission say what progress has been made towards adopting the measures, initiatives and actions agreed upon at the Euro-Mediterranean Conference in Barcelona?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission (10 July 1996)

The Euro-Mediterranean Conference in Barcelona generated strong political will on the part of the Member States and the Mediterranean partners to organize a rapid and effective follow-up to the Conference by arranging meetings within the framework of the action programme and encouraging the new multilateral talks.

Meetings covering the political, economic and human aspects of the declaration have been held since the beginning of this year. The Italian Presidency organized five Euro-Mediterranean ministerial conferences on cultural heritage, industry, tourism, energy and the information society. Meetings of experts on research, the environment, the rules of origin, statistics, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and organized crime have also been arranged by the Presidency and the Commission. About ten events bringing together various sections of society (religious groups, industrial federations and the two sides of industry) are planned for 1996.

The Barcelona organizing committee has met twice to coordinate activities and to finalize certain procedural rules, the seinor officials' working party has commenced the political and security dialogue

All the Mediterranean partners have taken an active part in all these events. The timetable for priority programmes for 1996 is being sent to Parliament on a regular basis.

Further initiatives are planned for the second half of 1996, in particular, meetings of the ministers for fisheries and home affairs, and meetings of experts on shipping and economic transition.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0666/96 by Bernie Malone (PSE) to the Commission (15 March 1996)

Subject: Capital mobility programme for academics

Are there any human capital mobility programmes for academics of Member States?

If there are no such programmes, are there any plans to introduce such a programme?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (21 May 1996)

All Community programmes for research and technological development are open to the participation of universities and research institutes. Programmes such as HCM (human capital and mobility, 1992-1994) and TMR (training and mobility of researchers, 1994-1998) are intensively exploited by academics who participate in all four activities (training through research, creation of research networks, access to large scale facilities and organisation of Euroconferences, summer schools and laboratory courses). Thousands of graduates and holders of doctorates from all Member States and more than one thousand research institutions, including a large majority of university departments, are participating in HCM and TMR.

The Erasmus programme was adopted by Council Decision of 15 June 1987 ((Council Decision 87/327/EEC - OJ L 166, 25.6.1987. )) to promote the mobility of students and cooperation between higher education establishments, including also the mobility of teachers. The activities under the Erasmus programme were integrated in the Socrates programme, the action programme for cooperation in the field of education, adopted on 14 March 1995 ((Decision No 819/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council - OJ L 87, 20.4.1995. )). Under Chapter I of the Socrates programme, Higher education (Erasmus), financial aid is granted to universities for the organising the mobility of students and teaching staff, but new activities connected with physical mobility were also introduced into Socrates (intensive training programmes, short-term education programmes bringing together students and teachers from different eligible countries, and preparatory visits to pave the way for teachers and administrative staff from higher education establishments to visit partner establishments in order to prepare a basis for future cooperative efforts).