ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3637/96 by Jean-Yves Le Gallou (NI) to the Commission (3 January 1997)

Subject: Budget heading B3-4303: Combating AIDS and certain other transmissible diseases

Can the Commission provide a breakdown of the figures, for each association and activity subsidised, for the subsidies granted in the financial year 1995, under budget heading B3-4303: Combating AIDS and certain other transmissible diseases?

Supplementary joint answer to Written Questions E-3598/96, E-3600/96, E-3603/96, E-3604/96, E-3605/96, E-3606/96, E-3607/96, E-3608/96, E-3609/96, E-3610/96, E-3611/96, E-3612/96, E-3613/96, E-3614/96, E-3615/96, E-3616/96, E-3617/96, E-3618/96, E-3620/96, E-3621/96, E-3622/96, E-3623/96, E-3624/96, E-3625/96, E-3627/96, E-3629/96, E-3630/96, E-3631/96, E-3632/96, E-3633/96, E-3634/96, E-3635/96, E-3636/96, E-3637/96, E-3638/96, E-3641/96, E-3642/96 and E-3644/96 given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (17 July 1997)

Further to its answer of 14 February 1997 ((OJ C 105, 3.4.1997. )), 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.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2219/96 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission (9 August 1996)

Subject: ESF assistance for retraining and re-employment of workers

In a trade-union tract the workers of the ailing IRITECNA/FINTECNA-IRI Group, who have been drawing the short-time working allowance since October 1993, claim that the Union has allocated LIT 4 500 billion under the European Social Fund to enable them to retrain and find new employment.

1. Has the above contribution in fact been granted?

2. If so, it is possible to ascertain how it is being used, given that the employees of the firms concerned (many of whom will soon lose their unemployment benefit) are wondering what has happened to the money and fear that it will be administered under a bankruptcy arrangement, as has previously been the case when funding of this type has been provided?

Supplementary answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (4 August 1997)

Further to its answer of 1 October 1996 ((OJ C 365, 4.12.1996. )), the Commission is now able to provide the following additional information.

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to her Written Question E-1408/97 ((OJ C 391, 23.12.1997, p. 82. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0286/97 by Jaak Vandemeulebroucke (ARE) to the Commission (13 February 1997)

Subject: Restriction on meat production - Regulation (EC) No 2222/96 of 18 November 1996

As a result of the BSE crisis a number of measures have been adopted to restrict meat production. One such measure is in Council Regulation (EC) No 2222/96 ((OJ L 296, 21.11.1996, p. 50. )) amending Regulation (EEC) No 805/68 ((OJ L 148, 28.6.1968, p. 24. )) on the common organization of the market in beef and veal.

I am informed by experts that the application of the amended Article 4i of Regulation EEC No 805/68, and in particular paragraphs 2 and 5, may lead to improper use or fraud if no adequate measures are taken.

Firstly, lighter animals, which weigh less than 85% of the average slaughter weight of the previous year, are also covered by the provisions on premiums. These animals should nevertheless also be able to be offered for slaughter without the premium.

Also, if no adequate measures are taken for the application of Article 4i (2) second indent, calves from a Member State with lighter calves will be slaughtered in Member States with a heavier average slaughter weight.

The same applies to the variation in the premium between the various regions in a Member State.

What measures has the Commission taken or does it intend to take to counteract this situation? Are there specific fraud prevention measures in relation to the points noted above?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (2 April 1997)

Provisions on the early marketing premium for calves were set by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2311/96 of 2 December 1996 ((OJ L 313, 3.12.1996. )) amending Regulation (EEC) No 3886/92 laying down detailed rules for the application of premium schemes in the beef and veal sector. Further amendments were made by Regulations (EC) No 18/97 ((OJ L 5, 9.1.1997. )), (EC) No 200/97 ((OJ L 31, 1.2.1997. )) and (EC) No 280/97 ((OJ L 47, 18.2.1997. )).

These provisions should be perfectly adequate to guarantee proper administration of the premium and obviate fraud risks. As regards any fear of speculative movement of animals, a compulsory retention period of 90 days has been set to thwart this danger (see point 2 in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 18/97).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0689/97 by Gerardo Fernández-Albor (PPE) to the Commission (6 March 1997)

Subject: Discrimination on the part of Brussels against the Spanish agriculture sector

The Spanish Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food has said that the Spanish agriculture sector is being discriminated against in Brussels.

She claims that the quotas allocated to Spain for certain products, such as arable crops or milk, are insufficient and show that 'the Spanish agriculture sector is being discriminated against, sometimes with problems resulting from previous negotiations and conditions'.

In view of these serious allegations by the Spanish Minister of Agriculture, can the Commission explain the reasons for such discrimination? Is it prepared to negotiate a fair settlement in order to eliminate the unfair discrimination alleged by the Minister?

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

The Commission does not agree that the Spanish arable and milk sectors are being discriminated against by the common agricultural policy (CAP).

In both sectors, Community policy is to control supply, by restricting the areas eligible for arable aid and limiting the right to produce in the milk sector (quota). The base areas and the milk quota were set on the basis of official historical statistics and, in both cases, the Spanish authorities accepted the references thus adopted.

It is true that some problems of overrun of the base areas for arable crops have arisen since the reform was implemented. However, these problems could be settled partly by making appropriate adjustments to the regionalization plan, which Spain itself worked out. It should also be stressed that the Commission has been flexible in dealing with exceptional circumstances such as the drought. This flexibility has reduced the negative effects of overruns on producers.

As a whole, the 1992 reform was very favourable to Spanish arable farmers, especially in view of the fact that aid has been paid irrespective of the quantities produced and that this has cushioned the impact of lower production resulting from the drought.

In the milk sector, Spain's initial quota was fixed in the context of the accession negotiations and was based on statistics provided by Spain. From 1993/94, the Community increased Spain's quota, making it possible to absorb a large part of the milk being produced over quota. It should be pointed out that the purpose of the quota system is precisely to prevent increases in production while at the same time ensuring an adequate development of producers' incomes.

Often the criticisms of the level of the Spanish quota reflect the idea that the quota should enable each Member State to be self-sufficient. This idea goes against the principles of the CAP, and it is not of course advanced with regard to those sectors in which Spanish production far exceeds its consumption.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1528/97 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission (5 May 1997)

Subject: Information on EC assistance granted to the Saarland from January to December 1994

In what amounts and for what measures did the Saarland receive Community resources in 1994 from:

1. the European Social Fund,

2. the Fourth Framework Research Programme,

3. the European Regional Development Fund,

4. the Community environment and energy programmes,

5. the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund, Guidance and Guarantee Sections,

6. other Community programmes?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1528/97 and E-1529/97 given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (29 May 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-0975/97 by Miguel Arias Cañete (PPE) to the Commission (17 March 1997)

Subject: EAGGF-Guarantee Fund in Austria

Can the Commission specify how much funding Austria received in total from the EAGGF-Guarantee Fund in 1996, giving a breakdown

per chapter (arable crops, sugar, fibre plants and silkworms, fruit and vegetables, other plant sectors or products, the vine-growing sector, tobacco, milk and milk products, beef and veal, sheepmeat and goatmeat, pigmeat, eggs and poultrymeat, other animal product aid measures, refunds on processed agricultural products, refunds in connection with EU food aid, the distribution of agricultural products to deprived persons in the Community, accompanying measures, rural development measures related to the operation of markets, other measures, income aid and the European Fisheries Guarantee Fund), and

per procedure (export refunds, compensatory pricing aid, 'area' aid, aid per head of stock, guidance premiums, private storage aid, withdrawal and similar operations, compensatory amounts, accompanying measures for reform of the CAP and public storage expenditure)?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0974/97, E-0975/97, E-0976/97, E-0977/97, E-0978/97, E-0979/97, E-0980/97, E-0981/97, E-0982/97, E-0983/97, E-0984/97, E-0985/97, E-0986/97, E-0987/97 and E-0988/97 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (6 May 1997)

Because of the length of the answer, which includes a number of tables, the Commission is sending it direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0144/97 by Jaime Valdivielso de Cué (PPE) to the Commission (24 January 1997)

Subject: Zero-rated VAT on newspapers

In view of the development of new technologies, and more specifically of the new information society, and of the distribution of information through new channels such as the Internet, has the Commission studied its possible impact on Europe's printed media?

Could this ability to access press reports via the Internet aggravate the crisis facing the newspaper industry? Could it increase the risk to jobs in the sector?

Bearing in mind the need for an independent press in order to inform public opinion, thus fulfilling an essential function of democratic control and public education, what strategic assistance can the Commission provide to deal with a process of change that will transform the industry?

Will it draw up legislation as soon as possible to zero-rate VAT in a sensitive industry whose social purpose is beyond dispute?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (1 April 1997)

The Commission does not intend to introduce a zero-rate for VAT in the sector of the newspaper industry. At present, some Member States are entitled to apply a zero-rate to books, newspapers, and periodicals according to Article 28 (2) of the sixth VAT Directive (77/388/EEC ((OJ L 145, 13.6.1977. ))). This article is part of the transitional arrangements which will be subject to revision in the context of the new common VAT system.

The Commission is mindful of the essential function of democratic control and public education that an independent press has to fulfil in modern society. It is noteworthy that most Member States currently favour books and newspapers mostly by applying a reduced VAT rate. This might suggest that some continuation of a reduced VAT rate under the new common system might be considered.

The Commission observes very carefully the impact of new technologies and especially of channels like the Internet on the newspaper industry and on the printed media in general. Developments in this area will be thoroughly examined with a view to possible consequences on the VAT regime applicable. A key question will be to check whether or not printed media and electronic media directly compete and if there is really a perceptible impact on the respective position in markets.

Taxing electronic media like the Internet would imply a number of technical tax questions which also need to be examined in detail. One of the most important issues in this context is control, which appears to be extremely difficult to establish in this area. The Commission is of the opinion that as long as VAT can be levied there is no reason either for renouncing VAT nor for introducing a new specific tax on electronic information technology like the so-called bit-tax.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0977/97 by Miguel Arias Cañete (PPE) to the Commission (17 March 1997)

Subject: EAGGF-Guarantee Fund in Denmark

Can the Commission specify how much funding Denmark received in total from the EAGGF-Guarantee Fund in 1996, giving a breakdown

per chapter (arable crops, sugar, fibre plants and silkworms, fruit and vegetables, other plant sectors or products, the vine-growing sector, tobacco, milk and milk products, beef and veal, sheepmeat and goatmeat, pigmeat, eggs and poultrymeat, other animal product aid measures, refunds on processed agricultural products, refunds in connection with EU food aid, the distribution of agricultural products to deprived persons in the Community, accompanying measures, rural development measures related to the operation of markets, other measures, income aid and the European Fisheries Guarantee Fund), and

per procedure (export refunds, compensatory pricing aid, 'area' aid, aid per head of stock, guidance premiums, private storage aid, withdrawal and similar operations, compensatory amounts, accompanying measures for reform of the CAP and public storage expenditure)?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0974/97, E-0975/97, E-0976/97, E-0977/97, E-0978/97, E-0979/97, E-0980/97, E-0981/97, E-0982/97, E-0983/97, E-0984/97, E-0985/97, E-0986/97, E-0987/97 and E-0988/97 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (6 May 1997)

Because of the length of the answer, which includes a number of tables, the Commission is sending it direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0493/97 by Ludivina García Arias (PSE) to the Commission (19 February 1997)

Subject: Implementation of Community RETEX initiative

Can the Commission supply detailed information on the implementation of the Community RETEX initiative since its commencement in the fifteen Member States, with the budget details, execution and names of projects broken down by Member State?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0493/97, E-0494/97, E-0495/97 and E-0496/97 given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (8 April 1997)

Under the terms of the guidelines on the Community Initiatives for industrial conversion adopted by the Commission in 1994, Member States were asked to forward draft operational programmes (OPs) to the Commission. 45 OPs were forwarded under Konver, 28 under Resider, 30 under Rechar and 13 under Retex. The Commission approved these operational programmes; their implementation, according to the principle of subsidiarity, is the responsibility of the Member States or regions which choose the projects to be financed on the basis of the OPs.

The tables being sent directly to the Honourable Member and to the Secretariat of Parliament contain full details of the amounts allocated to each Retex, Rechar, Resider and Konver OP for the period 1994-97, and on the budget implementation of those Community Initiatives up to 1996. The initial allocations are expressed in 1994 prices for the Community of Twelve and in 1995 prices for the new Member States.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1294/97 by Bill Miller (PSE) to the Commission (11 April 1997)

Subject: EU employment conditions

Do workers from the Isle of Man, Andorra, Monaco, Vatican City, San Marino and the Channel Islands have any special conditions applying to their employment which do not apply to workers from outwith the EU Member States?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1292/97, E-1293/97 and E-1294/97 given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (16 May 1997)

Andorra, Monaco, San Marino and the Vatican City are not part of the Community for the purpose of free movement of people. Consequently, citizens of these countries are not treated as Community nationals and hence do not enjoy the right of free movement conferred by Community law. Conversely, the EC Treaty free movement provisions do not apply to Community nationals in these countries, except in exceptional circumstances.

The position as regards the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man is complex. The EC Treaty applies only 'to the extent necessary to ensure the implementation of the arrangements for these islands set out in the United Kingdom Accession Treaty' (Article 227 5c).

Under Protocol 3 to the United Kingdom Accession Treaty, the Community rules on the free movement of workers are, in principle, not applicable on the territory of the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man. However, the authorities of those islands may not discriminate against natural and legal persons from the Member States. Concretely, this means that those authorities may, for example, require work permits of Community nationals provided that they do so in a way which does not discriminate according to the nationality of the person concerned.

As regards rights enjoyed by people from the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man, Protocol 3 expressly provides that they do not benefit from the Community provisions relating to free movement of people, but without prejudice to the rights which they enjoy in the United Kingdom under British domestic law.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0609/97 by María Estevan Bolea (PPE) to the Commission (27 February 1997)

Subject: Auto/Oil Programme

At the public hearing organized by the European Parliament's Committee on the Environment on 20 November 1996, entitled 'Clean Fuel for Clean Cars', I asked about the possibility of reducing traffic speed on the roads of several European Union Member States which do not have speed limits, in order to reduce air-polluting emissions. Mr Enthoven, Director-General of DG XI, replied that the Auto/Oil Programme was concerned solely with vehicles being driven in towns and cities.

Does this reply mean that one type of vehicle can be used for driving in towns and a different type used for driving on roads and highways? How can one find out which type of motor vehicle fulfils the requirements of the Auto/Oil Programme?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (16 April 1997)

Whilst much of the focus of the auto oil programme was on urban areas, it was also aimed at reducing non-urban and regional scale air quality problems, such as ozone.

The Commission's legislative proposals arising from the programme will affect all new passenger cars, light commercial vehicles and heavy duty vehicles from the year 2000 onwards. The proposal on passenger cars was submitted by the Commission in June 1996 ((COM(96) 248. )); those on light commercial vehicles were submitted by the Commission in February 1997 ((COM(97) 61. )) and those for heavy duty vehicles will be put forward towards the middle of this year. They will not distinguish between standards for urban areas and standards for non urban areas. However, consideration was also given in the programme to the contribution which could be made by non-technical measures such as traffic management, road pricing, public transport and scrappage schemes. This aspect will be further strengthened in the second auto oil programme which is now under way.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1166/97 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (26 March 1997)

Subject: Future of Ford plants in South Essex, UK

Given the fact that 6 000 people in my South Essex constituency work for the Ford Motor company at its radiator plant in Basildon, research and development base in Dunton, small car development plant at Aveley and at other sites, and given the fact that only a limited number of workers' representatives can attend works council meetings under the European directive, what additional action can the Commission take to ensure information and consultation about the company's plans reaches individual employees at shop floor level? What practical assistance can the Commission give to the trade unions in this respect?

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

Directive 94/45/CE ((OJ L 254, 30.9.1994. )) provides for the establishment within the undertakings and groups of undertakings concerned of a European works council or some other mechanism for transnational information and consultation of workers.

Although the number of members of these representative bodies is limited, the Directive contains two mechanisms aimed at bringing the European representative structure nearer to the workers of the companies concerned. Firstly, there is a requirement to ensure when establishing the European works council that all the Member States where the company operates are properly represented (Annex, point 1b), and secondly there is an obligation on the members of the European works council to inform the national representatives or, if there are no such representatives, the workforce itself, of the content and outcome of the information and consultation procedures at European level (Annex, point 3).

Although the European works council Directive does not apply to the United Kingdom, the Ford motor company has concluded an Article 13 agreement which also covers United Kingdom subsidiaries. However, the above-mentioned provisions set out in the Annex are not applicable in the case of agreements concluded under Articles 13 or 6 of the Directive unless they are specifically incorporated in such agreements.