ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2695/97 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission (1 September 1997)

Subject: Floods and environmental protection

As well as being caused by meteorological factors in the narrow sense, the latest floods in various parts of Europe and those which have occurred over the last few years in Italy and elsewhere have in many cases resulted from disturbances brought about by criminal policies that ruin the environment. According to a recent survey of the banks of the river Adda in Valtellina conducted by the Lombardy branch of the WWF, 690 buildings and smaller works, including 376 homes and 91 factories, are exposed to the risk of flooding. These findings patently demonstrate that there is no policy of prevention on the ground, thus offering an inducement to build on the banks in areas bordering the river.

In view of the grave dangers posed by this situation, will the Commission:

1. monitor hydrogeological risks, having regard to the conditions required for a safe environment?

2. propose that prior checks be carried out to ensure that forward urban development planning is compatible with the geological state of the terrain, especially in regions most at risk when rivers burst their banks?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (23 September 1997)

The Commission is extremely aware of the problem of flooding which too frequently takes place throughout Europe. A great deal of thinking and action has taken place over the last few years in order to give the Member States support in seeking ways to limit the risks and consequences of this type of event.

It will not fail to encourage and support the Member States in devising preventive measures and making up for the shortcomings is the action taken in the past in order to improve river basins. This applies to the recent action begun under Community initiative Interreg II.

In addition several research programmes have been devoted to the problem of flooding. These are aimed at developing techniques to ensure that a higher level of safety is achieved.

However, it does not fall within the Commission's competence to identify and monitor risk situations in the Member States, since this falls within the powers of the national, regional and local authorities within those Member States.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2298/97 by Peter Sichrovsky (NI) to the Council (18 July 1997)

Subject: Failure of government members to attend Council meetings

Do government members commonly fail to attend meetings of the Council?

How often have members of the Austrian Government failed to attend meetings of the Council since 1995?

Is it the Council's view that decisions it takes in the absence of members of a Member State's government are of secondary political importance for that Member State?

In the absence of members of its government, how has Austria made it known how it wishes to vote?

Answer (1 December 1997)

Member States of course endeavour to ensure that they are represented at Council meetings at ministerial level; experience shows, however, that this is not always possible and that it is therefore not uncommon for one or more Member States to be represented by persons other than Ministers or State Secretaries (usually then by Permanent Representatives or their deputies). In that case, the representatives may not take part in the voting procedure.

However, Article 150 of the EC Treaty and Article 7 paragraph 3 of the Council's Rules of Procedure ((Council Decision No 93/662/EC of 6 December 1993 adopting the Council's Rules of Procedure (OJ L 304, 10 December 1993, p. 1) amended by Council Decision No 95/24/CE, Euratom, CECA of 6 February 1995 (OJ L 31, 10 February 1995, p. 14). )) allow any Council member to delegate his/her right to vote to another Council member represented at ministerial level. Combined with the quorum rule provided for in Article 7 paragraph 4 of the Council's Rules of Procedure, under which the presence of eight members of the Council at ministerial level is required to enable the Council to vote, the delegation of vote may result in a situation where, at a given Council meeting, up to seven members may delegate their vote to the remaining eight Council members.

Since it joined the European Union in January 1995, Austria has been represented at all Council meetings. In each case in which the relevant member of government was unable to attend, the Austrian delegation was headed by the Austrian Permanent Representative to the European Union (or his deputy), as is common practice at the Europen Union.

It is not for the Council to speculate on whether the political importance a Member State attaches to decisions which might be taken at a given Council meeting is reflected by the person by whom that Member State is represented at the meeting.

The position and the vote of Austria and the issues under discussion at Council meetings are expressed at that meeting in conformity with Articles 146 and 150 of the EC Treaty and Article 7 paragraphs 3 and 4 of the Council's Rules of Procedure as explained above. The Honourable Member of the European Parliament will moreover be aware that when a vote takes place in the Council the record of that vote is made public - through the Council's Press Release - in accordance with the provisions of the Council's Rules of Procedure.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3058/97 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (2 October 1997)

Subject: COM in hops

The Commission has submitted a proposal for a Council Regulation (EC) amending Regulation (EEC) No 1696/71 on the common organization of the market in hops (COM(97) 98 final - 97/0066 CNS) ((OJ C 127, 24.4.1997, p. 11. )).

The proposal to amend the regulation on the common organization of the market in hops is to be welcomed, since it complies with the current basic principles for market organization and is designed to achieve income and market stability.

Will the Commission provide for a temporary set-aside of hop growing areas, since this would make a decisive contribution to helping the sector adjust more flexibly to changing market conditions and guarantee market shares for European producers?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (20 October 1997)

Temporary set-aside of some of the area under hops would result in permanent loss of market share to the United States, where production continues to increase.

Since the market in hops is a free one with unrestricted play of supply and demand, the market organization has never sought to impose strong constraints on the sector. What is important is to be alert to signals from the market. Varietal conversion is in fact the best way of responding to its requirements.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3348/97 by Frank Vanhecke (NI) to the Commission (22 October 1997)

Subject: Office costs of Commission officials

When the Berlaymont building in Brussels had to be evacuated because of the asbestos discovery, the Belgian Government arranged for alternative office accommodation for the Commission's officials.

Can the Commission state what was the total rent paid by the Belgian Government for this alternative accommodation for the years 1995, 1996 and 1997?

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

Since the rents for the alternative office accommodation to replace the Berlaymont are paid by the Régie des Bâtiments (Public Property Administration) of the Belgian State, the Commission is unable to supply the information requested by the Honourable Member.

Only the Régie des Bâtiments (Directorate for Brussels-Capital, Section III) can supply the information.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2954/97 by Patricia McKenna (V) to the Commission (17 September 1997)

Subject: Scraping of the radioactive discharge pipe at the La Hague nuclear complex, France

Greenpeace has filed a complaint with the European Commission over the scraping of the radioactive discharge pipe at the French nuclear complex, Cap de la Hague.

The environmental group has argued that France has allowed Cogema to undertake this delicate operation, which is likely to produce a great deal of radioactive waste, without following the proper procedures. In particular, Greenpeace alleges that France has not respected Council Directive 85/337/EEC ((OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40. )) on environmental impact assessment, Article 37 of the Euratom Treaty under which it should have first notified the European Commission of this operation, the 1972 International Convention of London and the Convention on Marine Pollution in the North Atlantic (OSPAR).

What action will the Commission be taking in respect of this complaint?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (20 October 1997)

The French authorities have been invited to provide the Commission with all relevant information concerning the removal of the scale in the discharge pipe at La Hague. This is the first step of a thorough legal and technical examination, taking into account the environmental and radiological risks involved in the operations.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2350/97 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission (10 July 1997)

Subject: European legislation on waste disposal

In its answers to written questions E-1409/97 ((OJ C 373, 9.12.1997, p. 120. )) and E-1410/97 ((OJ C 373, 9.12.1997, p. 120. )) on compliance with European waste disposal legislation in Italy, the Commission mentioned that it would remind the Italian authorities of the need to respect Article 4 of Directive 91/156/EEC ((OJ L 78, 26.3.1991, p. 32. )).

Can the Commission say which authority it actually dealt with and what exactly it said to this authority?

Can the Commission also provide a general picture outline of the way Community waste disposal legislation, in particular Directive 91/156/EEC, is applied in Italy?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (4 September 1997)

The Commission always deals with Member States' Permanent Representation to the European Communities.

The Permanent Representation forwards the letter from the Commission to the relevant ministry, in this case the Ministry for the Environment. The action taken by the Commission consists of outlining the allegations in the complaint, petition or written question, reminding the national authorities of the Community environmental legislation applicable to the case drawn to the Commission's attention and requesting them to obtain information and comments on the allegations within two months.

As regards the Italian legislation applying the Directives on waste, certain aspects still fail to comply with Directive 91/156/EEC. Infringement procedures have also been initiated in a number of specific cases.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2737/97 by Gianni Tamino (V) to the Commission (1 September 1997)

Subject: Incompatibility of Veneto regional law No 15 of 22 May 1997 with Community legislation

Regional law No 15 of 22 May 1997 on the breeding for exhibition or as pets of species of birds other than game birds born in captivity was published in official bulletin No 43 of the Veneto region, Italy, on 27 May 1997.

Does this law comply with European directives on the protection of wild birds and game birds?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (10 October 1997)

The Commission has obtained and is examining the law cited by the Honourable Member, and will not hesitate to initiate the procedure provided in Article 169 EC Treaty should this prove necessary.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2007/97 by Leonie van Bladel (UPE) to the Council (18 June 1997)

Subject: Ethiopia

Can the Council explain why no pressure has been put on the Ethiopian authorities in the light of the serious human rights violations committed against the Oromo ethnic group?

Can the Council explain why, during the talks on development aid, the parties were not urged to enter into a peaceful and constructive dialogue with the 25 million strong Oromos?

Is the Council aware of the fact that EU development aid does not always reach the competent organizations and that the Oromos are automatically excluded from European development aid from the EU?

Has the Council taken up with the Ethiopian authorities the fact that Ethiopian journalists, and in particular journalists from the province of Oromia or of Oromo descent, are seriously impeded in their work, and furthermore that journalists have been imprisoned and tortured without any charges being levelled against them and without any sort of trial?

Is the Council prepared to reconsider, or stop, aid to Ethiopia for as long as the Ethiopian army conducts military operations against the Oromos?

Answer (10 November 1997)

The Council follows the situation in Ethiopia closely and is aware of the reports of human rights abuses in Ethiopia, against ethnic groups, including the Oromos. It fully shares the concern of the Honourable Member about this situation. However, according to available information, there is no clear link between the specific ethnicity of the Oromos and human rights violations by the authorities. Nevertheless, whenever possible the Council has taken and will take every opportunity to raise the need for respect of human rights with the Ethiopian authorities. The Union has indicated its willingness to help Ethiopia to improve respect of human rights.

The Council does not share the position of the Honourable Member concerning the automatic exclusion of the Oromos from the EU's development aid.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3037/97 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (1 October 1997)

Subject: Heightism

It is absurd that, as Europe approaches the year 2000 and after 50 years of efforts by the European Community to eradicate discrimination on grounds of sex, race, ethnic and social origin, disability, sexual preference, religious belief, etc., cases of discrimination on grounds of height are occurring.

In Italy, a new graduate in medicine made a standard application to perform his military service at the Scuola degli Allievi Ufficiali di Complemento (AUC) [School of Official Reserve Cadets].

However he was rejected because, at 1m 63 cm, he was not tall enough to meet the arbitrary height requirement of 1m 65 cm. As proof of the new recruit's aptitude, he was enlisted as a private soldier in the parachute corps.

Will the Commission approach the Member States to ensure that serious cases of this nature, in which the equal rights of citizens are denied, never occur again? (The doctor in question is Dr. Andrea Pomesano of Bergamo).

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (10 November 1997)

The Commission does not have the authority to deal with the matter raised by the Honourable Member.

As Community law stands, the Member States bear sole responsibility for all matters relating to military service.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3296/97 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission (20 October 1997)

Subject: Moves by Turkey to destabilize the Aegean

It has been reported in the press that the Turkish secret services are drawing up plans aimed at destabilizing the Aegean under the pretext of 'pursuing' persons masquerading as Kurdish guerrillas to one of the islands of the Eastern Aegean.

The whole operation is intended to discredit one of the Member States of the EU, namely Greece, by suggesting it is a centre of terrorism and to undermine Greek sovereignty, while ostensibly combating and preventing acts of terrorism.

Given that Turkey is a state linked to the EU by association agreement, which means that it is duty-bound to respect the rules of international law, will the Commission say what it intends to do in order to forestall a general destabilization of the Aegean, the consequences of which would be felt by the EU itself?

Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (17 November 1997)

The Commission takes the view that it has no jurisdiction in this matter.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2987/97 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission (1 October 1997)

Subject: Ecological disaster in the Mediterranean caused by mutated seaweed

In recent years there has been rampant growth in the Mediterranean of a species of mutated tropical seaweed, 'Caulerpa Taxifolia', which was brought to Europe to decorate the aquarium of a zoo in Germany. The seaweed underwent a mutation, resulting in the creation of a new species which is spreading very rapidly and resisting all attempts to destroy it.

Wherever the weed appears, coral, sponges, crabs and any other forms of marine flora and fauna are no longer to be found, and even fish are now disappearing. This new species of seaweed is spreading at a rapid rate, and a massive ecological disaster is in the making in the sensitive region of the Mediterranean basin.

What action does the Commission intend to take and what measures are needed to avert the disaster which is inevitably facing the Mediterranean?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (30 October 1997)

By using the LIFE financial instrument the Commission jointly financed an international project between 1992 and 1995 that was intended to study the problem caused by the expansion of caulerpa taxifolia seaweed in the Mediterranean and to anticipate the subsequent developments in that area. The project was carried out by French, Spanish and Italian teams.

In view of the outcome of that project and the uninterrupted expansion of the seaweed the Commission decided in 1995 to grant a second instalment of LIFE funding to a project intended to involve experiments on seaweed eradication techniques and to draw up a strategy for controlling its expansion. The project is being coordinated by the Posidonie Scientific Interest Grouping (SIG) in Marseilles, from whom the Honourable Member will be able to obtain more detailed information.

More particularly the Posidonie SIG held an international symposium on 19-20 September 1997 on controlling the expansion of caulerpa taxifolia, the documentation on which is due to appear shortly.

It should be noted that although the Commission is involved in identifying this problem and in the experimental resolution stages via the LIFE financial instrument, any structural action to be taken is the responsibility of the Member States concerned.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2422/97 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE) to the Commission (11 July 1997)

Subject: Adoption by the Commission of the ICCAT recommendations

At its last annual assembly the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tuna (ICCAT) adopted a recommendation on banning imports of bluefin tuna from Honduras, Belize and Panama until those countries give proof that they are following the ICCAT's recommendations.

Why has the Commission not taken any steps in connection with those recommendations?

When does the Commission intend to take such steps, bearing in mind that the deadline expires on 4 August 1997?

When does the Commission intend to adopt the other measures decided on by the ICCAT in respect of bluefin tuna, such as the ban on using fishing lines in vessels over 24 m in length or the ban on the use of aircraft?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-2394/97 and E-2422/97 given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (17 September 1997)

The Commission endorses the Honourable Member's view that implementation of the recommendation of the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) asking the contracting parties to ban imports of bluefin tuna from Belize and Honduras is a matter for the Community, since the measures would be adopted by Member States.

The Commission intends to table proposals for the Community to adopt ICCAT's recommendations on bluefin tuna as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2348/97 by Patricia McKenna (V) to the Council (18 July 1997)

Subject: Bringing Khmer Rouge leaders to trial

A recent report by Amnesty International called on the international community to help bring Khmer Rouge leaders who are believed to have been responsible for gross human rights abuses in Cambodia to justice and to ensure that they receive fair trials.

Amnesty stated that there was a persistent lack of fairness and transparency in the Cambodian judicial system and 'efforts to implement reforms have been hampered by tensions within the coalition government'. For that reason the Cambodian judicial system would encounter formidable difficulties in ensuring trials for the Khmer Rouge leaders which meet international standards of fairness.

Because the charges which Khmer Rouge leaders are likely to face include breaches of the Geneva Convention - which are crimes of universal jurisdiction - Khmer Rouge leaders may be tried in any state.

What measures does the Council propose to take to ensure that Khmer Rouge leaders facing charges of human rights abuses can receive fair trials in EU states so that the perpetrators of the abuses that have plagued Cambodia for decades can be brought to justice?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-2348/97 and E-2744/97 (17 November 1997)

1. The European Union has followed with concern the recent developments in Cambodia. In particular, it has made representations to King Sihanouk and the two joint Prime Ministers, Ung Huot and Hun Sen, in order to obtain political guarantees for a rapid return to constitutional normality in Cambodia.

The European Union has expressed its concern at allegations of summary justice and disappearances following the coup of 5 July 1997. The European Union has asked for the maximum amount of light to be shed on these reports and for respect for human rights to be stored immediately.

Confirmation of the above has been provided by the Cambodian Government.

2. The part played by the Khmer Rouge has been a determining factor in the recent Cambodian crisis, which led to Prince Ranarriddh being ousted as joint Prime Minister. In fact, the Khmer Rouge still hold territories in the north of the country.

The European Union is in favour of a negotiated solution between all parties which are prepared to accept constitutional legality, with a view to national reconciliation.

It is agreed that perpetrators of extortion and crimes against humanity as defined by the Geneva Convention must be brought to justice as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2039/97 by Bernhard Rapkay (PSE) to the Commission (13 June 1997)

Subject: EU funding channelled to the Eastern Ruhr area (the cities of Dortmund and Hamm, and Unna district)

What volume of European Union funding, earmarked for which measures, was channelled into the Eastern Ruhr area in 1995 and 1996 from the following:

1. the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF),

2. the European Social Fund (ESF),

3. EU research programmes,

4. EU education programmes,

5. EU youth programmes,

6. EU programmes in the environmental field,

7. EU programmes in the energy field,

8. other EU programmes?

Supplementary answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (13 November 1997)

Further to its answer of 3 July 1997 ((OJ C 391, 23.12.1997, p. 151. )), the Commission is now able to provide the following additional information.

In view of the length of its answer, the Commission is sending it direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.