ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1825/97 by Carles-Alfred Gasòliba i Böhm (ELDR) to the Commission (28 May 1997)

Subject: Imports of agricultural products in the autonomous community of Valencia

The autonomous community of Valencia imports large volumes of agricultural products from non-European Union countries, including wine, rice, vegetables, honey, dried fruits, tiger nuts and citrus fruits, which frequently arrive without undergoing any kind of monitoring or inspection as regards compliance with EU phytosanitary standards.

As the Commission is aware, various consignments of Egyptian potatoes which do not comply with these standards have been found to have entered the region, and the associated risk remains.

Can the Commission say what type of analogous monitoring measures are laid down for products imported from third countries as regards the application of quality standards laid down by the European Union, phytosanitary regulations and permitted levels of residues?

Is the Commission taking account of the economic repercussions of such imports on maintaining farmers' incomes in the Mediterranean basin, and specifically in the Valencian agricultural region?

How will the Commission effectively regulate these imports and compensate Valencian agriculture for the damage inflicted due to the lack of adequate monitoring of the above imports?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (24 June 1997)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question E-1726/96 by Mr Vallvé ((OJ C 11, 13.1.1997. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1096/97 by Jesús Cabezón Alonso (PSE) to the Commission (21 March 1997)

Subject: Non-discrimination clause in the revised Treaty

With regard to the wording of Article 62 of the Treaty, as proposed by the Irish Presidency at the Dublin European Council as part of the revision of the Treaty, does the Commission not think that requiring unanimity when dealing with issues of discrimination will present a huge obstacle to any efforts to introduce Union measures to combat this problem?

Would qualified majority voting not make it easier to take Union measures to overcome all forms of discrimination?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (20 May 1997)

Article 6a of the draft reform of the Treaty on the European Union contained in the addendum prepared by the Dutch Presidency relates to the fight against all kinds of discrimination.

At the Intergovernmental Conference, the Commission is urging that qualified majority voting be applied in all areas which are not constitutional in nature or content.

While recognising the very sensitive nature of measures relating to the fight against discrimination, there can be no doubt that qualified majority voting would make it easier to take decisions in this area.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1325/97 by James Moorhouse (PPE) to the Council (10 April 1997)

Subject: Human rights violations in Tunisia

Regarding the resolution on human rights violations in Tunisia adopted by Parliament in May 1996 (B4-0606/96 ((OJ C 166, 10.6.1996, p. 204. ))), referring to the ongoing and growing harassment by the Tunisian authorities of those who defend human rights and public liberties in their country, will the Council ensure that the issue of human rights is addressed at EU/Tunisia meetings within the MEDA programme and that pressure is brought to bear on Tunisia - within that same programme - so that Tunisia respects its international human rights commitments, freedom of expression and democratic rights?

Answer (2 July 1997)

Article 3 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1488/96 of 23 July 1996 on financial and technical measures to accompany the reform of economic and social structures in the framework of the Euro-Mediterranean partnership (MEDA), states that respect for democratic principles and the rule of law and also for human rights and fundamental freedoms constitutes an essential element of the Regulation. Violation of that element justifies the adoption of appropriate measures.

The guidlines for indicative programmes provided for in Article 5(2) of the Regulation were adopted by Council Decision 96/706/EC of 6 December 1996. The promotion of human rights, democratization and the rule of law are referred to again in points 17 and 18 of the Annex to that Decision as objectives of the measures falling within the scope of the MEDA Regulation.

As regards the possibility of raising the human rights issue in the context of the MEDA programme, the implementation of this programme is, as the Honourable Member is aware, a matter primarily for the Commission, under the terms of Articles 9 to 15 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1488/96. Nevertheless, while respecting the relevant spheres of competence, the Council will pay close attention to the matter.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0990/97 by Miguel Arias Cañete (PPE) to the Commission (17 March 1997)

Subject: Farmers in Austria

Will the Commission say how many farmers there are in Austria and how many people are directly employed in agriculture in that country at the present time?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0989/97, E-0990/97, E-0991/97, E-0992/97, E-0993/97, E-0994/97, E-0995/97, E-0996/97, E-0997/97, E-0998/97, E-0999/97, E-1000/97, E-1001/97, E-1002/97 and E-1003/97 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (2 May 1997)

Survey on the structure of farms

>TABLE>

Source: Eurostat.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1002/97 by Miguel Arias Cañete (PPE) to the Commission (19 March 1997)

Subject: Farmers in Portugal

Will the Commission say how many farmers there are in Portugal and how many people are directly employed in agriculture in that country at the present time?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0989/97, E-0990/97, E-0991/97, E-0992/97, E-0993/97, E-0994/97, E-0995/97, E-0996/97, E-0997/97, E-0998/97, E-0999/97, E-1000/97, E-1001/97, E-1002/97 and E-1003/97 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (2 May 1997)

Survey on the structure of farms

>TABLE>

Source: Eurostat.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0303/97 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (13 February 1997)

Subject: Eligible areas

The identification of eligible regions and areas is affected by a variety of factors, including the variable dimensions of administrative territorial units, the lack of homogeneous statistics, the obsolete nature of some of the data, the basis for calculating GDP and the flexibility of some of the criteria used.

With regard to determining eligible areas for Objective 2, the Commission's role has been very limited and the basic criteria have been overlooked in favour of secondary criteria that are less transparent, and difficult to quantify or compare.

This situation, which has seen a considerable increase in the number of eligible areas, as well as overlapping between them, is affecting the planning, management, monitoring and assessment of the activities as a whole.

Does the Commission intend to play a greater role in determining eligible areas under Objective 2?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (7 April 1997)

The eligibility criteria for declining industrial areas under Objective 2 do indeed fall into two groups, with basic criteria on the one hand and supplementary criteria, which can be applied by the Member States, on the other.

With regard to the basic criteria, the statistics used are harmonized by the Commission and can, as a result, be used for comparisons between Member States down to level III of the Nomenclature of Territorial Statistical Units (NUTS), or even in some cases below that level.

The role of the Commission in drawing up the list of eligible areas for Objective 2 has been reduced since the Council's 1993 reform of the Structural Fund regulations. This largely explains the greater geographical spread of eligible areas. On the other hand, the Commission has ensured that there is no overlapping between eligible areas, in accordance with the regulations in force.

As far as the future role of the Commission in this matter is concerned, this is to be addressed during preparatory negotiations for adoption of the future Structural Fund regulations.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0877/97 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (12 March 1997)

Subject: Green Paper on financial services and consumers

The Green Paper 'Financial Services: Meeting Consumers' Expectations (COM(96) 209 final) offers an important opportunity for considering in depth and analysing existing problems and obstacles, in order to devise better safeguards for users of financial services and ensure better distribution of trans-border services. Representatives of consumer organizations and the banking, insurance and financial sectors have contributed to the discussion and consideration of these issues. It has been noted that the Commission text is full of ideas and information, but also questions and contradictions. The general approach set out in the text seems to be to consider consumer protection of secondary importance to the completion of the internal market. Could the Commission change its attitude and attach equal importance to both objectives? Without adequate benefits for the consumer in terms of greater convenience and better-quality services, the single market may turn out to benefit producers of goods and services only, without reference to ordinary people's needs.

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (29 April 1997)

The Commission in no way regards consumer protection as being of secondary importance to the completion of the internal market. Both objectives are equally important and their implementation must run in parallel. The Commission fully shares the Honourable Member's view that, without benefits for the consumer, the single market may be perceived as benefiting producers of goods and services only.

The Commission is convinced that this is not the case in that consumers already benefit in two respects from the single market in financial services. Firstly, the significantly keener competition between between suppliers of financial services (for example, cross-frontier branching in the banking sector has risen by 58% since 1993) is stimulating innovation and is being reflected in prices. The emergence of direct banking can be attributed to the need to reduce costs in order to remain competitive. Secondly, the harmonization to date of certain provisions on consumer protection is consistent with the dual objective of increasing consumer confidence in the single market and removing the obstacles facing suppliers as a result of disparities between national laws, thereby helping to diversify supply in a given market.

The Commission is quite aware that this does not mean that the situation viewed from the angle of the consumer is altogether satisfactory. Obstacles and problems have been identified during the consultations undertaken by the Commission as the follow-up to its Green Paper. The Commission will now be endeavouring to remedy the situation by all appropriate means, including legislation. It will shortly be adopting a communication on the matter.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1016/97 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (19 March 1997)

Subject: Cloning

Experiments conducted in laboratories in Scotland and New Zealand, albeit successful in defining a new frontier in biogenetic research, have raised the question of whether limits should be set for research and scientific experiments. Although cloning represents a major scientific breakthrough, from an ethical point of view it needs to be studied and regulated in a society with major requirements adapted to scarce resources.

Will the Commission:

1. set up a high scientific committee to study the ethical and legal implications and possible scenarios opened up by genetic cloning?

2. put forward a directive which, while confirming the conclusions of the Council of Europe's resolution of 16 March 1989 and the results of the first bioethics convention it adopted in December 1996, prohibits both human and animal cloning?

3. put forward a directive setting scientific limits that respect ethical values and serve to shield human beings from possible scientific manipulations?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1016/97 and E-1194/97 given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (21 May 1997)

As the Honourable Member knows, the Commission immediately referred the matter to the advisory body on the ethics of biotechnology - an independent body - which should give its opinion by the end of May. The purpose is to consider in depth the ethical implications of cloning in general, in the light of the recent experiments. The advisory body has, moreover, decided to hold a round-table conference on this subject, to which Members of Parliament, representatives, high-level research scientists and other interested parties will be invited. In taking this initiative, characterized by dialogue and transparency, the advisory body has the full backing of the Commission.

The Commission is also looking at the possible implications of cloning for Community policies and considering what action it may take within its sphere of competence.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1306/97 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (11 April 1997)

Subject: Safety regime for fishing vessels

The Commission has submitted a proposal for a Council Directive setting up a harmonized safety regime for fishing vessels of 24 metres in length and over (COM(96)255 final - 96/0168 SYN) ((OJ C 292, 4.10.1996, p. 29. )), (CES 1392/96/0168 SYN).

It is extremely important that, as the Commission proposes, common safety standards and requirements be laid down for fishing vessels of 24 metres in length and over, as a first step. The Commission's intention to consider introducing new measures over and above those already laid down for other existing vessels and for vessels under 24 metres in length also deserves support.

Would the Commission ensure that the relevant studies are available by 1 January 1998, so as to enable the new proposals which it intends to submit to cover the above types of vessel as well?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1306/97, E-1307/97 and E-1308/97 given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission (22 May 1997)

In the explanatory memorandum of the Commission's proposal for a Council Directive setting up a harmonised safety regime for fishing vessels of 24 metres in length and over ((OJ C 292, 4.10.1996. )), the Commission stated that it intends to examine whether, for fishing vessels below 24 metres in length, further measures are required to complement those already included in Council Directive 93/103/EC of 23 November 1993 on the minimum health and safety requirements for work on board fishing vessels ((OJ L 307, 13.12.1993. )). The Commission envisages that a study on the issue will be undertaken in the second half of 1997.

The provisions of the Commission's proposal will give Member States the legal power to subject a fishing vessel flying the flag of a third country and operating in their internal waters or territorial seas or landing its catch in their ports to control in order to verify compliance with the safety standards required by this Directive. Logistic means for executing such controls both on-shore and off-shore are already in place in the framework of Council Directive 95/21/EC on Port State Control ((OJ L 157, 7.7.1995. )) and the control system applicable to the Common Fisheries Policy.

With regard to the collection of data on fishing vessel casualties and working accidents on board, the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question E-272/96 by Mr Pronk ((OJ C 105, 3.4.1997. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0892/97 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (12 March 1997)

Subject: Asbestos levels on the premises of Community institutions

The use of asbestos as a building material for the premises housing European institutions has been the subject of numerous controversies. Even after the Berlaymont Building was closed, the private tests carried out at the request of the Parents' Association have demonstrated that asbestos is still being used in the Brussels buildings, in spite of the assurances from the Brussels Buildings Directorate that there could not possibly be any traces of the substance at the Uccle school.

Although it is no longer being used in such large quantities, asbestos is still being manufactured, and measurable concentrations can be detected in the new buildings in Brussels. Out of 20 tests conducted in the Eastman Building, 13 produced a positive result; the corresponding figures for the Remorqueur Building are 16 out of 19, for the Remard Building, 1 out of 8, for the van Maerlant Building, 2 out of 11, for the Montoyer Building, 1 out of 17, and for the Léopold Building, 7 out of 20.

What steps will the Commission take to ensure compliance with the Directives on checks on asbestos levels in buildings?

What will it do to protect public health and avert the health risk to persons working on premises where the presence of asbestos has been detected?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0892/97 and E-1017/97 given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (25 April 1997)

On 19 September 1983 the Council, on a proposal from the Commission, adopted Directive 83/477/EEC on the protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to asbestos at work (second individual Directive within the meaning of Article 8 of Directive 80/1107/EEC) ((OJ L 263, 24.9.1983. )). This Directive was amended, also on the Commission's initiative, by Council Directive 91/382/EEC of 25 June 1991 ((OJ L 206, 29.7.1991. )).

These two Directives, which contain prohibitions and value limits to be applied to asbestos in buildings, have been transposed into the legislation of the Member States.

Belgium has introduced equal or stricter standards than those provided for in the above Directives into its general regulation on protection at work. In addition to these provisions, a Belgian ministerial order requires every employer in Belgium to prepare a table showing the asbestos levels in his premises.

In its buildings in Brussels, the Commission not only complies with the two directives mentioned above but also with Belgian legislation where it is stricter.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1273/97 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission (11 April 1997)

Subject: Latest developments in the construction of the Casaletto to Largo Argentina high-speed tramway by Rome City Council

In her answer to Written Question E-1508/96 ((OJ C 356, 25.11.1996, p. 48. )) Mrs Bjerregaard stated, on behalf of the Commission, that it might be possible for the Commission to intervene directly with the Italian authorities with regard to the project for the Rome Underground line 'C'.

The question pointed out the failure on the part of Rome City Council to apply the procedure laid down in Directive 85/337/EEC ((OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40. )) for environmental impact assessment in connection with this project.

However, when answering, again on behalf of the Commission, priority Written Question P-0141/97 ((OJ C 186, 18.6.1997, p. 234. )) on a very similar issue, i.e. the construction of a high-speed tramway by Rome City Council, which, like underground lines, also comes under Annex II to Directive 85/337/EEC, Mrs Bjerregaard does not mention the possibility of bringing infringement proceedings, pursuant to Article 169 of the EC Treaty, for failure to transpose that Directive properly, as in the case of the Rome Underground line 'C'. Nor does she refer to the possibility of intervening with the Italian authorities in the same way as for that Underground line.

Can the Commission explain the reasons for two different answers to two apparently similar questions?

Finally, can the Commission say whether any steps have actually been or are being taken in this connection?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (5 May 1997)

Infringement proceedings pursuant to Article 169 of the EC Treaty concern the failure to provide in Italian law for the projects listed in Annex II to Directive 85/337/EEC on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment. They therefore cover both of the projects referred to by the Honourable Member, namely the Underground line 'C' and the Casaletto to Largo Argentina tramway.

The Commission has been in contact with the Italian authorities in both cases, as regards the Underground line as well as the high-speed tramway line.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1150/97 by Lucio Manisco (GUE/NGL) to the Council (2 April 1997)

Subject: Violation of human rights in the United States

According to reports by the international organization for the protection of human rights, 'Human Rights Watch', a growing number of female prisoners in the United States are raped and sexually assaulted in prison. According to a long report prison administrators and warders abuse prisoners increasingly often but the authorities do not intervene. The prisoners are forced to perform the most degrading sexual acts and if they become pregnant they are obliged to have an abortion. Despite these reports the Justice Department does not take appropriate action and these abnormal practices continue.

What steps does the Council intend to take vis-à-vis the US Administration and Justice Department to ensure that these practices, which degrade and humiliate women are discontinued in a country which is an ally and a friend, and that human rights are finally respected in US prisons?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1149/97 and E-1150/97 16 June)

Minimum standard for the treatment of individuals in custody are set out in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) of 16 December 1966 and in the United Nations Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment adopted on 10 December 1984. The USA is a State Party to both the ICCPR and the UN Convention. The Council expects all States Parties to these and other international instruments to fulfil the commitments and obligations into which they have entered.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1105/97 by Jesús Cabezón Alonso (PSE) to the Commission (21 March 1997)

Subject: Support by the Commission for the event entitled 'First European meeting'

What is the framework within which the event 'From the assertion of identity to political violence' is taking place, and on what grounds has the Commission decided to sponsor the 'First European meeting: from the assertion of identity to political violence' (Biarritz, Donostia/San Sebastian), which was recently cancelled but then arranged for 6 and 7 March 1997?

Has it agreed to allow a political group of the European Parliament (ARE) to make capital out of the event and use the expression 'sous l'égide de la Commission européenne' (under the auspices of the Commission)?

Which Commission department is responsible for this matter?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (16 May 1997)

No decision has been taken to lend the Commission's auspices to the meeting by the Paris-based 'Reunir', on the subject 'De la revendication identitaire à la violence politique'. The Commission has learned that the meeting has been postponed to an unspecified date.