ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1205/96 by Bill Miller (PSE) to the Commission (15 May 1996)

Subject: Assistance to SMUs within the craft sector

SMUs within the craft sector are recognized as the mainstay of employment in many rural areas throughout the European Union. However, the publicizing and exporting of craft industry products is, in many instances, haphazard because of scale and the relatively small turnover of many of these businesses.

What assistance is offered to SMUs in the craft sector to publicize and export their products, at trade exhibitions and fairs within the European Union or potential markets outside the EU?

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission (6 June 1996)

The Commission launched in 1994 a transnational co-operation pilot action between craft firms and micro-enterprises aiming to create durable partnerships between craft and small enterprises from the Community and the European economic area. The project is intended to develop fields such as cross-sales, product co-manufacturing, research and development and third market searches which are crucial for the development of product exportation. It should help reduce obstacles in gaining market knowledge and ease the development of distribution structures abroad. The intermediaries involved in this project consist of non-profit-making development agencies, small and medium sized enterprise intermediaries and public economic promotion organisations. The Commission covers 50% of the total cost for each project, but its support is limited to 20 000 ECU overall. A similar call for proposals will be implemented in 1996.

Furthermore, in its proposal for the third multiannual programme for small and medium sized enterprises (1997-2000) ((COM(96) 98 final. )), the Commission envisages a pilot action supporting a joint participation of craft and small businesses in trade fairs.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0875/96 by Herbert Bösch (PSE) to the Commission (17 April 1996)

Subject: Staff policy

To be successful, a strategy for the introduction of the Central and Eastern European States requires an active training policy for citizens of those states in the institutions of the European Union. I would therefore ask:

1. How many stagiaires from Central and Eastern Europe have worked at the Commission since 1990 and where were they placed?

2. Is there a category of stagiaires from the Central and Eastern European States?

3. According to which criteria are they selected?

4. How many stagiaires (divided up according to country) will work in the Commission in the coming years?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (20 May 1996)

The Commission shares the Honourable Member's view and has been engaged in an active training policy for nationals of Central and Eastern European countries since 1990.

1. Since 1990 the Commission has organized two types of training course. 356 officials from central and eastern European countries have participated in three-month courses financed by the Phare programme. 65 young graduates from central and eastern European countries have participated in five-month administrative training courses. Trainees have been assigned to nearly every department in the Commission.

Week-long seminars have been organized for officials from central and eastern European countries.

2. Breakdown by country:

>TABLE>

3. Priority was given to applicant countries. Trainee officials are selected by ministries in cooperation with the missions accredited to the European Union. Administrative trainees are recruited on the basis of the provisions on in-service training at the European Commission, and they must hold a degree at bachelor level awarded by a recognized university on completion of a full course of studies. They must be no more than 30 years old and have a good knowledge of one Community language. The Commission takes account of results obtained during the course of studies and gives priority to those who have completed or started a study of European integration.

4. In the 1996 budget, Parliament for the first time authorized an appropriation of ECU 500 000 (budget item A-3201/1996) for organizing traineeships and seminars for young diplomats from central and eastern European countries. The programmes are in preparation. This Parliament initiative will enable the number of traning courses for these nationals to be significantly increased.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1019/96 by Dominique Baudis (PPE) to the Commission (3 May 1996)

Subject: Human rights situation in Turkey

The situation of the Kurds is worrying and many people have been arrested and are in prison in Turkey at the present time.

Human rights are not respected in Turkey, even though in December 1994 Parliament gave its assent to the Customs Union agreement in order to give Turkey an opportunity to draw closer to Europe.

Will the Commission swiftly implement a procedure for monitoring respect for human rights and the development of democracy in Turkey?

Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (4 June 1996)

The Commission is closely monitoring Turkey's democratization process and its human rights situation, which continues to give great cause for concern.

The three-month political crisis that followed the elections on 24 December 1995 made dialogue between the Commission and the Turkish Government difficult, but a recent visit by the Member of the Commission responsible for relations with Turkey enabled dialogue to resume on a range of issues including human rights and the Kurdish problem.

In this regard, the Commission has noted recent statements by the Turkish Prime Minister raising the possibility of granting the Kurdish population certain linguistic and cultural rights. It has also noted statements by the Interior Minister on the possible lifting of the state of emergency imposed in south-eastern Turkey.

The annual report on the human rights situation and the development of democracy in Turkey which the Commission has undertaken to present to Parliament will provide an opportunity to review the general situation and the progress made in connection with those statements.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0904/96 by Pieter Dankert (PSE) and Carlos Pimenta (ELDR) to the Commission (23 April 1996)

Subject: New Tagus bridge financed from the Cohesion Fund

Pursuant to Article 5 of Annex IV of the decision on project 94/10/65/005 the Advisory Committee must check whether in the construction of the new Tagus bridge, partly financed from the Cohesion Fund, the Community rules in particular on the environment have been observed.

Has this committee taken action against the illegal dredging activities, against the dumping of sediments outside the designated sites, against activities on the salt marshes in the breeding season of the birds which nest there and against the lack of fences protecting birds and humans?

Has the Commission representative on this committee alerted the Commission to the infringements of the various rules with a request for action?

If so, why has the Commission not started an inquiry, as referred to in Article 10 of the decision on project 94/10/65/005?

If not, why has this committee and the Commission representative no knowledge of matters which are widely reported in the Portuguese media?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0904/96, E-0905/96, E-0906/96, E-0907/96 and E-0908/96 given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (9 July 1996)

The Commission is conducting a detailed investigation of the problem raised by the Honourable Members and will inform them of the outcome as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0954/96 by Viviane Reding (PPE) to the Commission (26 April 1996)

Subject: Dialogue with the Union of Financial Officials in Europe

The Union of Financial Officials in Europe wrote to Commissioner Monti on 28 June and 3 October 1995 and 15 January 1996. It has received no reply to these written enquiries.

Why does the Commissioner not wish to continue the positive dialogue which his predecessor, Mrs Scrivener, maintained with a trade union which has no fewer than 420 000 members in Europe? When does the Commissioner intend to initiate this vitally important dialogue?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (20 June 1996)

The contacts between the Commission and the trade union organisations at European level have been characterized in the past, as they are at present, by a spirit of cooperation and dialogue. Further to the written enquiries received from the Union of financial officials (UFE) the member of the Commission responsible for customs and taxation had a meeting with the President of the UFE in Brussels on 4 June 1996.

The Commission considers the professional commitment on the part on the UFE an essential and positive input for its work, for instance in questions of the fight against fraud, the reinforcement of the education and training programmes initiated by the Commission for the national customs administrations or the increased use of information technology. The Commission therefore regrets all the more strongly that for reasons of sheer lack of time none of its members was able to participate personally on the dates suggested by the UFE. However, care was always taken to ensure that the Commission was represented at a high level, as was the case with the conference of the committee of the UFE in Brussels on 22 September 1995 which was attended by the Director general in charge of customs and indirect taxation in the Commission.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0969/96 by Christine Oddy (PSE) to the Commission (26 April 1996)

Subject: CEMR Conference of Women Elected Representatives

Is the Commission aware of the final statement of the Council of European Municipalities and Regions (CEMR) Conference of Women Elected Representatives of Local and Regional Authorities held in Dublin in 1995 which called for the Commission to continue to co-finance the CEMR Committee? Will the Commission make that commitment?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (31 May 1996)

The Commission has had good working relations with the Council of European Municipalities and Regions (CEMR), in particular the Committee of Women Elected Representatives of Local and Regional Authorities, which received a grant in 1995 for its fifth European conference held in Dublin in July.

The Commission hopes to continue this cooperation and is willing to consider any funding applications from the CEMR under the procedures governing one-off 'non-programme' grants and depending on available budget funds.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0785/96 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission (1 April 1996)

Subject: Sale of puppies from Eastern Europe

Every year in Italy, in the city of Milan alone, more than 1500 puppies die after being imported from Eastern Europe. Besides the suffering caused to these young puppies which are taken away from their mothers when only a few weeks old, and forced to endure long journeys under appalling conditions, this raises concerns for our own dogs, many of which are contracting diseases which had been eradicated here.

Is the Commission aware that this trade in puppies is being carried on in the absence of any health controls?

The most helpful measure would be a ban on removing puppies from their mothers before they are 90 days old and on putting them on sale without being fully vaccinated.

Is the Commission aware of the need to introduce common regulations to protect both puppies and their owners?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (6 May 1996)

In so far as the Honourable Member refers to the trade in dogs (as distinct from the movement of pets), the dogs must, when imported, conform to Community animal health legislation (Council Directive 92/65/EEC ((OJ L 268, 14.9.1992. ))). Depending on their age they must be identified, be vaccinated against a number of diseases, be healthy at entry into the Community, and be accompanied by a veterinary certificate.

The transport of these dogs within, to and from Member States is subject to Community welfare requirements (Council Directive 91/628/EEC ((OJ L 340, 11.12.1991. ))).
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1671/96 by Angela Sierra González (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (12 June 1996)

Subject: Implementation of the ESF in the Canary Islands

Could the Commission say what funds have been allocated under the European Social Fund in the Canary Islands, Spain, and state whether the 'Fundación para la Formación y el Empleo' (Foundation for Vocational Training and Employment) based in Arrecife, Lanzarote, receives funding under the ESF or any other Community initiative programme?

Could the Commission say whether the budget has been implemented correctly, bearing in mind that most of the Foundation's expenditure in organizing courses has been devoted to infrastructure and non-teaching staff?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (5 July 1996)

In accordance with the Commission Decision 94/624/EEC of 29 June 1994 ((OJ L 250, 26.9.1994 )) approving the Community support framework for the Objective 1 regions in Spain for the period 1994-1999, the amount allocated under the European Social Fund (ESF) to the operational programme of the Canaries region represents MECU 182.91 (1994 prices).

Following the reform of the structural funds, concrete data for each intervention cofinanced by the ESF are no longer available to the Commission in Brussels. However, the Commission has asked the Spanish authorities (ESF Administrative Unit, Ministry of Labour), to provide the necessary information as soon as possible to be able to reply to the question.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1439/96 by Christine Oddy (PSE) to the Commission (12 June 1996)

Subject: Ahmadi Muslims in Pakistan

Is the Commission aware that Ahmadi Muslim families living in Abbottabad (NWFP) in Pakistan are facing a campaign of intimidation by the Youth Force of Anjuman Tahaffuz Khatme Nubbawat (organization for the protection of finality of prophethood) and that a Mr Riaz Ahmad was stoned to death?

What steps will the Commission take to denounce this intolerance in Pakistan?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission (28 June 1996)

The Commission is not aware of the particular incident to which the Honourable Member refers. It is aware of the general situation of Ahmadis in Pakistan and has raised the subject in the political dialogue between the Union and Pakistan.

The Commission attaches the greatest importance to respect for human rights and demonstrates this on all possible occasions in its bilateral relations with partners, including Pakistan.

Furthermore, the Commission has clearly indicated that respect for human rights will be the cornerstone of the deepening of relations between the Union and Pakistan when negotiations take place for a new cooperation agreement. It is included as such in the draft directives for negotiations with Pakistan, as recently submitted by the Commission to the Council.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1349/96 by Jean-Yves Le Gallou (NI) to the Commission (3 June 1996)

Subject: Community subsidies to associations, NGOs and various bodies

Can the Commission provide a full list of the associations, NGOs and bodies receiving Community subsidies under budget heading B7-302 (Aid towards self-sufficiency for refugees and displaced persons in Asia and Latin America)? Can it state the exact total of these subsidies at the close of the last financial year?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission (25 June 1996)

The Commission is sending a table to the Honourable Member and Parliament Secretariat with details of the financing decisions adopted by the Commission under budget heading B7-302 for non-governmental and international organizations.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0483/96 by Peter Crampton (PSE) to the Commission (1 March 1996)

Subject: Killing of sharks

In view of the large-scale killing of sharks to make fin soup in restaurants, what measures does the Commission intend to introduce if any, and when, in order to ban the import of shark fins into EU Member States?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (12 April 1996)

The Commission is aware of the fact that some shark species are heavily utilized around the world for their fins, but also for their skins and meat, and that levels of exploitation may not always be sustainable and may thus be detrimental to the longterm survival of certain shark species.

The ninth meeting of the conference of the parties to the Convention on international trade in endangered species of wild fauna and flora (CITES), held in November 1994, expressed concern about these risks and the lack of adequate monitoring and control of the international trade in parts and products of sharks. Particularly the collection of species-specific data is a complex task considering that some 100 species of shark are being exploited - both commercially and for recreation - and that numerous countries around the world utilize this marine resource. A resolution therefore calls on CITES parties to provide all available information on the trade and biological status of shark species, including historical catch and trade data. The CITES animals committee was directed to review and summarize such information made available by the parties, Food and agriculture organization (FAO) and other international fisheries management organizations, as well as by non-governmental organizations. A discussion paper will be submitted to the next meeting of the CITES conference of the parties in June 1997.

CITES is implemented in the Community through Council Regulation (EEC) No 3626/82 ((OJ L 384, 31.12.1982 )) and the Community fully participates in the work of its conference of the parties, committees and working groups. Any measures proposed by the Commission on sharks will be based on the results of this process.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1342/96 by Jean-Yves Le Gallou (NI) to the Commission (3 June 1996)

Subject: Community subsidies to associations, NGOs and various bodies

Does the Commission know the exact number of associations, NGOs or bodies which received subsidies under the Community budget in the financial year 1995?

Are they classified in the budget into chapters or major headings?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (16 July 1996)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0086/96 by Philippe Monfils (ELDR) to the Council (30 January 1996)

Subject: Euro-Asian Summit

1. The first summit between Europe and Asia is to be held in Bangkok on 1 and 2 March 1996. It has been decided that each of the two parties will be allowed to choose its own representatives and, where Asia is concerned, it is ASEAN which has made the choice. This means that South Asia will not be present at the summit although it has a population of approximately 1.2 billion. Is this Euro-Asian summit therefore really worthy of the name?

2. A number of EU Member States have expressed the view that India should be present at the next summit, although the question may be asked as to who will determine the participants. In view of the extremely close political and economic links between India and Europe, could the Council not ensure that the Bangkok Summit conclusions contain a declaration to the effect that India will be present at the next summit?

Reply (16 July 1996)

In their replies to the question put in June 1995 by Anita Pollack on the same subject, both the Council and the Commission specified that in the framework of preparations for the first Asia-Europe meeting which was held in Bangkok on 1 and 2 March 1996 it had been agreed, in accordance with ASEAN's proposal, that the choice of participants in that meeting was the responsibility of both parties. The decision was taken in the light of the need to limit the number of participants in the first meeting so that it could remain a manageable size.

The next meeting will be held in the United Kingdom in 1998. Even if no decision was taken in Bangkok on participation in this future meeting, the conclusions adopted by the Heads of State or of Government provide that the Asia-Europe Union will assess at the time the question of which countries might participate in the future meeting.

In the particular case of India, the Honourable Member's attention is drawn to the fact that the Commission intends to send to the Council in the very near future a communication on strengthening relations between that country and the European Union.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1053/96 by Susan Waddington (PSE) to the Commission (13 May 1996)

Subject: Human rights and China

In response to further evidence of the systematic abuse of fundamental human rights by the Chinese Government, e.g. the 'dying rooms' of Chinese state orphanages, and given that such matters received little attention at the EU-China Dialogue of 29 January 1996, or at the EU-Asia summit of 29 March, what action will the Commission to taking to encourage China to take action in this area given the Council's decision to sign a UN resolution with the United States on human rights in China?

Answer given by Sir Leon Brittan on behalf of the Commission (4 June 1996)

The situation of Chinese orphanages was one of the principal topics which the European Union discussed during the Dialogue of 29 January 1996 to which the Honourable Member refers. To demonstrate the importance attached to this issue, EU representatives used this occasion as an opportunity to visit an orphanage with some 400 beds in the Peking conurbation area.

The Commission, in close liaison with non-governmental organizations working on the spot, is currently examining what action could be taken to alleviate the serious deficiencies displayed by orphanages in China, particularly in terms of infrastructure and supervisory staff.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1555/96 by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission (17 June 1996)

Subject: Omission of the English flag

Can the Commission confirm how many different lapel badges it produces with the EU flag and flags of other nations or regions within and outside the Union?

Can the Commission explain why although Scotland and Wales are included in this plethora, the English flag is not available?

Is this merely an oversight or rather is it Commission policy?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (22 July 1996)

The Commission ordered 173 207 lapel badges in 1995. These were all with the European flag emblem, without national flags.

The Commission does not order lapel badges with the flags of individual Member States. The badges to which the Honourable Member refers, namely with the Scottish and Welsh flags, would have been produced by the private sector.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0725/96 by Concepció Ferrer (PPE) to the Commission (26 March 1996)

Subject: Cohesion Fund projects

In December 1995 the Commission approved 225 projects financed by the Cohesion Fund in Spain, Greece, Ireland and Portugal. Can the Commission say which projects were approved for Spain, who submitted them and what sums were granted to each of these projects?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (21 May 1996)

In the 1995 financial year, the Commission adopted 14 decisions concerning Spain in respect of transport infrastructure at a cost of ECU 610 million, the budget breakdown of which for 1995 per mode of transport was as follows:

>TABLE>

In the same period, the Commission adopted 47 decisions concerning the environment. The aid in question amounted to ECU 574 million and covered, for 1995, the following:

>TABLE>

Further information is given in the 1995 annual report of the Cohesion Fund which will be available very shortly.

With regard to the origin of the project in question, the Commission has had dealings only with the Spanish government authorities on this question.