ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1442/97 by Roberto Mezzaroma (UPE) to the Commission (28 April 1997)

Subject: European policy in the areas of construction and infrastructure

In view of the major importance to the EU of the construction and building sector - both private and public - and of infrastructure (highways, civil engineering works) both for growth and employment, can the Commission state if and when it intends to submit a draft communication on this subject in a sector of activity that is crucial for the future of the Union?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (18 June 1997)

The Commission shares the Honourable Member's views on the importance of construction in the Community. This is indeed one of the main industrial sectors in terms of production and job creation. With more specific regard to employment, a strategic study commissioned by the Commission ((Strategies for the European Construction Sector - A Programme for Change (1994). )) emphasised that 8.8 million direct jobs in the sector have led to 17.6 million indirect jobs.

In view, particularly, of the above, the Commission is exploring the expediency of preparing a communication to the Council, Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions in which it would examine the key elements affecting the sector's competitiveness.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2153/97 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission (23 June 1997)

Subject: Novel food regulation No 258/97 - Submission of DNA reference samples by applicants for a product

Is there any provision for manufacturers of genetically engineered food to submit to the supervisory bodies the information they need to perform their tasks (e.g. information on the detailed structure of the genetically engineered matter)?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-2113/97, E-2115/97, E-2117/97, E-2119/97, E-2121/97, E-2123/97, E-2127/97, E-2129/97, E-2131/97, E-2133/97, E-2135/97, E-2137/97, E-2139/97, E-2141/97, E-2143/97, E-2145/97, E-2147/97, E-2149/97, E-2151/97, E-2153/97, E-2155/97, E-2157/97, E-2159/97, E-2161/97, E-2163/97, E-2165/97, E-2167/97, E-2169/97, E-2171/97, E-2173/97, E-2175/97, E-2177/97, E-2179/97, E-2181/97, E-2183/97, E-2185/97, E-2187/97, E-2189/97, E-2191/97, E-2193/97, E-2195/97, E-2197/97, E-2199/97, E-2201/97, E-2203/97 and E-2205/97 given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (17 September 1997)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1785/97 by Sirkka-Liisa Anttila (ELDR) to the Commission (16 May 1997)

Subject: Overturning of the ban on the import of hormone-treated meat and its effects on EU consumers' health and on their right to refuse to eat such meat

According to information published in Finland, the EU is losing its fight in the WTO's Dispute Settlement Body to maintain the ban on hormone-treated meat which it imposed on health grounds. If it loses, it will mean dismantling the legislation banning, on health grounds, the import of such meat.

The use of hormones to promote meat production is customary in the USA, whereas in the EU it is prohibited by legislation precisely on the grounds of these hormones' effect on health.

There is not enough scientifically obtained evidence that hormones, particularly those used in meat production, are harmless to consumers. If the WTO's Dispute Settlement Body now decides otherwise, it will be disregarding the protection of consumers' health and showing that commercial interests have a greater influence on their decision.

EU consumers cannot be forced to eat meat produced with hormones as a result of a DSB decision! It is thus vitally important that EU consumers should always have the right to all essential information about the ethics of food production and the composition of in foodstuffs in terms of raw ingredients, including the use of hormones and genetically altered material.

The protection of consumers' rights and the guarantee of adequate information must also be included on the agenda for the Amsterdam summit.

The Member States, including Finland, have placed consumer policy, and in particular the improvement of consumers' rights, on the agenda for the IGC. EU consumers' confidence in meat has already taken a battering as a result of the BSE crisis. The EU cannot therefore afford any kind of new hysteria or uncertainty about meat.

What measures are the Commissioner responsible for consumer affairs and the relevant Commision officials prepared to take to protect consumers' rights if the DSB should overturn the EU's hormone ban imposed on health grounds?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (18 June 1997)

The World trade organisation (WTO) panel on the complaints brought by the United States and Canada, against Community legislation concerning the import of meat and meat products derived from animals to which hormones have been administered for growth promotion, has issued its interim findings.

The Commission considers that these interim findings contain significant errors and has asked for them to be reviewed. As the dispute settlement procedure, including the appeals procedure, has yet to be completed, the Commission is not in a position to predict the outcome.

The Honourable Member is correct in stating that Community consumers cannot be forced to eat meat produced with hormones as a result of a WTO decision. Whatever the outcome of the dispute settlement procedure in these cases, the Commission will not make any proposal which would result in a lowering of the high level of consumer protection which obtains in the Community.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2117/97 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission (23 June 1997)

Subject: Novel food regulation No 258/97 - Authorization of varieties

1. Is it true that all plant products which are authorized as varieties will no longer require application or the simplified authorization procedure pursuant to the novel food regulation ((OJ L 43, 14.2.1997, p. 1. ))?

2. If so, will any products processed from such plants require authorization pursuant to the novel food regulation?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-2113/97, E-2115/97, E-2117/97, E-2119/97, E-2121/97, E-2123/97, E-2127/97, E-2129/97, E-2131/97, E-2133/97, E-2135/97, E-2137/97, E-2139/97, E-2141/97, E-2143/97, E-2145/97, E-2147/97, E-2149/97, E-2151/97, E-2153/97, E-2155/97, E-2157/97, E-2159/97, E-2161/97, E-2163/97, E-2165/97, E-2167/97, E-2169/97, E-2171/97, E-2173/97, E-2175/97, E-2177/97, E-2179/97, E-2181/97, E-2183/97, E-2185/97, E-2187/97, E-2189/97, E-2191/97, E-2193/97, E-2195/97, E-2197/97, E-2199/97, E-2201/97, E-2203/97 and E-2205/97 given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (17 September 1997)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2313/97 by Patricia McKenna (V) to the Commission (3 July 1997)

Subject: New deal for reprocessing spent nuclear fuel at Sellafield

The June 4 1997 issue of the 'Sellafield Newsletter', published by British Nuclear Fuels Ltd (BNFL), states that the company has signed a new deal for reprocessing the 'remaining uncontracted spent (nuclear) fuel' from the five Advanced Gas-cooled Reactors (AGRs) run by Nuclear Electric Ltd. BNFL predicts that the deal could involve up to 3000 tonnes of spent fuel being sent to Sellafield and that the company would then decide whether to reprocess it in the Thorp plant or to store it.

Has the Commission been notified of this deal by the British authorities? If so, what other details have the British authorities provided the Commission with? In particular, what provisions will be made for safety in the transport of the fuel to Sellafield and in its storage on site?

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission (31 July 1997)

The deal mentioned by the Honourable Member is of a commercial nature. Therefore, no specific notification had to be made to the Commission.

The safe transport of spent fuel is assured by transport companies in Europe according to the provisions established by the International atomic energy agency (IAEA) and included in international transport conventions. Council Directive 94/55/EC of 21 November 1994 ((OJ L 319,12.12.1994 and OJ L 275, 28.10.1996. )) on the transport of dangerous goods by road and Council Directive 96/49/EC of 23 July 1996 ((OJ L 235, of 17.9.1996. )) on the transport of dangerous goods by rail, implemented and enforced under the responsibility of the national authorities, apply to the national and intra-Community transport of spent fuel.

All practices which involve a risk from ionising radiation, including the storage and transport of spent fuel, have also to comply with the basic safety standards for the protection of the health of workers and the general public. The most recent revision of the basic safety standards is contained in Directive 96/29/Euratom of 13 May 1996 ((OJ L 159, 29.6.1996. )). National authorities are responsible for the implementation of these standards.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2003/97 by Juan Colino Salamanca (PSE) to the Commission (11 June 1997)

Subject: The use of pure sugar in the manufacture of yeast for baking

For years manufacturers of baker's yeast have been advocating the use of pure sugar at more or less the world market price, as is the case in other fermentation industries producing citric acid, glutamic acid, etc.

Is the Commission aware of this discrimination between industries in the same sector?

For what reasons have yeasts not yet been included in Annex II to Regulation 334/93 ((OJ L 38, 16.2.1993, p. 12. )) on the use of set-aside land for industrial purposes?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (18 July 1997)

The Commission is aware that active yeast is not admitted as an eligible product for receiving the production refund on certain sugar products used in the chemical industry (Council Regulation (EEC) No 1010/86 ((OJ L 94, 9.4.1986. ))).

Although Regulation (EEC) No 1010/86 is regularly reviewed by the Commission in close cooperation with the Member States, active yeast has never been considered eligible for addition to this Regulation.

Active yeast has not been included in the list of eligible end products in the framework of the non-food set-aside scheme (Commission Regulation (EEC) No 334/93), due to concern about possible market distortions for molasses, glucose and sugar. Furthermore, Member States foresee difficulties with respect to effective control of the non-food set-aside scheme if active yeast were to be included in this scheme.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1563/97 by Yves Verwaerde (PPE) to the Commission (6 May 1997)

Subject: Harmonization of professional status

Will the Commission say what it intends to do about the possible harmonization of the status of travelling salesmen within the Union?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (30 June 1997)

Directive 86/653/EEC of 18 December 1986 on the coordination of the laws of the Member States relating to self-employed commercial agents ((OJ L 382, 31.12.1986. )) harmonizes Member States' legislation governing the contractual relationship between a principal and a commercial agent acting as a self-employed intermediary. The Directive does not, however, apply to representatives who are employees.

As for labour legislation applicable to employed representatives, legislative proposals relating to specific categories of employed persons do not feature among the priority measures envisaged in the Commission's medium term social action programme.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2104/97 by Concepció Ferrer (PPE) to the Commission (19 June 1997)

Subject: Euro-Mediterranean Agreement with Egypt

During the Euro-Mediterranean Conference in Malta, the Association Agreement between the European Union and Jordan was signed, once the final differences between the two parties had been settled.

The Agreement with Egypt has not yet been signed because of a number of differences over market access for certain agricultural products (flowers, oranges, potatoes).

Given the economic and political importance of association agreements for Mediterranean countries not members of the European Union, will the Commission say what progress has been made in the negotiations concerning the Association Agreement between Egypt and the European Union?

Answer given by Mr Marin on behalf of the Commission (29 July 1997)

The Commission is fully aware of the economic and political importance of the new Association agreement with Egypt.

The negotiations with Egypt started in January 1995 and were followed by eight negotiating rounds, the last in March 1997.

Agriculture has proved to be one of the major obstacles in these negotiations. Egypt seeks to secure certain tariff preferences which, in the Community's view, are excessive and incompatible with the present situation of agricultural markets.

The Commission, has proposed tariff preferences which permit some further development of Egypt's agricultural trade. This approach has, however, been refused by Egypt so far.

There is also still disagreement on a number of other trade related issues and on the provisions on social cooperation.

As regards the important chapter of trade in industrial products, Egypt transmitted a first draft of the schedule for tariff dismantling on imports from the Community only at the beginning of June 1997. This document has been discussed in the course of a technical meeting with Egypt which took place on 24/27 June 1997.

On that occasion, it was agreed to hold, possibly before the summer recess, three further technical meetings respectively on processed agricultural products, rules of origin and tariff dismantling, with a view to a new full negotiating round in September 1997.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1113/97 by Honório Novo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (24 March 1997)

Subject: Reduction of the fleet of Empresa de Pesca de Viana and Community aid

The fisheries company Empresa de Pesca de Viana (EPV) which has been in business for nearly fifty years, has always been involved in catching and drying cod, and more recently in catching, processing and freezing a range of types of fish.

In recent years, the company has significantly reduced its number of vessels (from 12 to 2-3) and has also made major cuts in its workforce - from around 300 eight years ago to around 70 at present.

Now, at the beginning of this week, 39 of the above 70 have received notice that their current contracts will not be renewed. Among the reasons given is the reduction in the size of the fleet. However, the indications are that EPV has no plans to pay any compensation at all to the workers whom it plans to dismiss. I also have information which suggests that the previous wave of job cuts was carried out without any redundancy payments being made.

I know for a fact that the above reduction in the number of vessels was carried out with support from Community funds.

Exactly how many EPV vessels were decommissioned using Community cofunding? What was the total amount of such funding?

Did the funds granted to EPV include sums specifically earmarked for a redundancy scheme designed to reduce the number of jobs? If so, can the Commission give details of the figures?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (16 May 1997)

The Commission is sending directly to the Honourable Member and to the Secretariat of Parliament data on ships which benefited from Community aid and the amounts of aid granted.

During the period in question (1986-92), Community legislation on the granting of premiums for the permanent laying-up of fishing vessels did not include specific funding for social measures.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1614/97 by José Valverde López (PPE) to the Commission (7 May 1997)

Subject: Economic impact on Spanish agriculture of the negotiations on imports of agricultural products from Egypt

Among the issues being discussed in bilateral negotiations between the European Union and Egypt is that of imports by the EU of Egyptian agricultural products. Egypt is said to be seeking to export produce to the value of ECU 1.5 billion per year, including 750 000 tonnes of potatoes, 300 000 tonnes of oranges, 475 000 tonnes of rice and 30 000 tonnes of flowers.

Has the Commission assessed the impact on Spanish agriculture of these agreements?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (17 June 1997)

The Honourable Member refers to the negotiations held by the Commission with Egypt since 1995 for a new Euro-Mediterranean agreement. The different views concerning the reciprocal concessions on agricultural products constitute at present an important obstacle to the progression of the negotiations. The Commission believes that the Egyptian requests go beyond traditional trade and do not comply with the guidelines agreed with all the mediterranean partners in the Barcelona declaration in November 1995.

The Commission's position takes into account the Barcelona declaration and is in accordance with the current negotiating mandate adopted by the Council, which, as in the negotiations concluded with Morocco, Tunisia and Israel, is based on the traditional trade flows of agricultural products. The Commission can assure the Honourable Member that the Community position in the negotiations will take appropriate account of the sensitivity of each sector of production.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2108/97 by Gérard Caudron (PSE) to the Commission (23 June 1997)

Subject: Making Commission information brochures available to MEPs

Members of the European Parliament serve as an important channel for information about Europe in their respective constituencies. Conferences, visits to schools and official openings of facilities all offer the chance to distribute information brochures drawn up by the Commission and printed by the Publications Office.

Although these brochures are of great value and have proved very successful, it is difficult to obtain them in any quantity.

Commission offices in the Member States do not seem to have them available in sufficient quantities for widespread distribution. In addition, Members are sometimes asked to pay for these brochures themselves, which seems unusual.

How can large quantities of these brochures be obtained?

Will the Commission remind its offices in the Member States of their obligations to Members of the European Parliament?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (1 August 1997)

The Commission is gratified that the Honourable Member thinks so highly of its brochures.

Information brochures are generally intended for the public at large and are handed out free of charge except in the rare cases where the technical nature of the subject matter justifies a charge being made.

These brochures are distributed in response to demand from, among others, the Parliament and the Commission's offices and delegations, which are systematically consulted and which generally receive the number of copies requested. Naturally, after a certain time, stocks may be exhausted.

The Commission will remind its offices in the Member States that they should pay the greatest attention to requests from Members of Parliament.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2408/97 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission (10 July 1997)

Subject: Dogfights

For some time now it has been fashionable both in the European Union and other parts of the world to organize fights between animals.

A complex network of criminal associations has been reaping substantial profits by organizing large-scale gambling on fights between animals, particularly dogs trained to kill each other.

The turnover during the last year for fights of this kind has been calculated at more than 1000 billion lire, with some 5000 dogs being killed in Italy alone by being torn to pieces in the course of these criminal displays.

In addition, mafia and criminal organizations are springing up with all the consequences this entails.

Will the Commission draw up a directive imposing a total ban on dog fights and call on the Member States to punish severely anyone organizing brutal exhibitions of this kind?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (10 September 1997)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to her Written Question E-2995/92 ((OJ C 86, 26.3.1993. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1935/97 by Edouard des Places (I-EDN) to the Commission (27 May 1997)

Subject: 1997 drought and set-aside

Some regions of the European Union have had an exceptionally dry spring in 1997.

Farmers no longer have the necessary fodder to feed their livestock, particularly in the very extensive systems in the less favoured regions of the Community (poor soils, limited nitrogenous fertilization, etc.).

Livestock farmers have observed that land which has been set aside under the CAP has been producing significant quantities of fodder whose use for any purpose is prohibited, whereas it could be used to restore the fodder stocks needed to feed animals in drought-stricken areas (either through direct grazing or after harvesting).

Will the Commission adopt exceptional dispensation measures to permit fodder from CAP set-aside land to be used free of charge by livestock farmers during this drought year?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (11 June 1997)

The statutory provisions on the management of set-aside are to be found in Article 7 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1765/92 ((OJ L 181, 1.7.1992. )) and in Commission Regulation (EC) No 762/94 ((OJ L 90, 7.4.1994. )). They state that areas set aside can be used for no agricultural production other that of non-food crops, nor for any revenue-generating purpose incompatible with arable crops.

Neither grassland nor the harvesting of the plant cover are covered by these provisions.

It is true that at one time it was feared that the drought would affect plant cover. However, the latest information on the state of the crops is that a normal harvest can be expected. There is therefore no reason to derogate from the rules in force. In any case, a local drought problem can always be met by the market and regional supplies.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1980/97 by Peter Skinner (PSE) to the Commission (9 June 1997)

Subject: Heavy Goods Vehicles - fiscal regimes and movement controls

What action is the Commission taking to coordinate and harmonize HGV fiscal regimes and movement controls to ensure fair competition, and complete the single market in this sector?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission (31 July 1997)

In July 1996 the Commission adopted a proposal for a Council directive on the charging of heavy goods vehicles for the use of certain infrastructures ((OJ C 59, 26.2.1997. )) intended to replace Directive 93/89/EEC ((OJ L 279, 12.11.1993. )), which regulates road fiscal matters in the Community.

The Commission proposal is currently under examination in the Council and the Parliament which gave the proposal a first reading in July 1997.

Regarding movement controls, the Honourable Member is referred to the Commission's reply to written question E-41/97 by Mr Cornelissen ((OJ C 186, 18.6.1997. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0871/97 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (12 March 1997)

Subject: Environment (LIFE)

With regard to budget heading B3-320: LIFE, a financial instrument for the environment - measures on Community territory, can the Commission say whether subsidies have been granted for Italy and, if so, for which organizations and for which activities?

Supplementary joint answer to Written Questions E-0858/97, E-0859/97, E-0860/97, E-0861/97, E-0862/97, E-0863/97, E-0864/97, E-0865/97, E-0866/97, E-0867/97, E-0868/97, E-0869/97, E-0870/97 and E-0871/97 given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (22 September 1997)

Further to its answer of 25 April 1997 ((OJ C 319, 18.10.1997, p. 81. )), the Commission is now able to provide the following additional information.

The Commission is sending direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat a table containing the information requested.