ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-4169/97 by Eryl McNally (PSE) to the Commission (21 January 1998)

Subject: SKY satellite transmission in the EU

According to the satellite television company SKY, British copyright laws forbid British citizens who have paid for SKY broadcasting within the UK from receiving transmissions whilst visiting or residing in other countries in the European Union. Consequently, many British citizens who reside in or visit other countries in the European Union are forced to either forego SKY, or illegally take their SKY card abroad and give SKY a UK address. None of the other countries within the EU have any restrictions on the viewing of their channels and they are available in all other European countries.

What can the Commission do to help ensure that British subscribers to SKY satellite television will be able to enjoy the same rights and conditions as those already enjoyed by their fellow-Europeans?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (24 February 1998)

The Commission is aware that the reception of certain satellite broadcasting services across the Community is limited for reasons mainly related to copyright. This situation does not apply only to the broadcasting service which the Honourable Member mentions, but also to a series of other satellite broadcasting services established in other Member States.

The Commission has already examined these cases where consumers are restricted in their choice of television programmes, but has concluded that it cannot intervene since there seems to be no infringement of Community law.

Limitations on the reception of certain satellite broadcasting services are not based on national regulatory restrictions on the retransmission of television services, but depend on commercial decisions taken by the broadcasting operators concerned, mainly due to the exploitation agreement with the rightholders for the broadcasting of their works. As a result there is no infringement of internal market requirements.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3625/97 by Luciano Vecchi (PSE) to the Commission (13 November 1997)

Subject: Guarantees required in respect of participation in the employment initiative in Belgium

As has already been pointed out in earlier questions, the Italian authorities' decision to require non-profit-making undertakings to provide bank guarantees in order to participate in employment initiatives has proved costly and punitive for undertakings which obviously have difficulty in providing financial guarantees of their own.

Given that such matters are subject to different regulations in the various Member States of the Union, would the Commission state whether Belgium requires non-profit-making undertakings (and, in general, firms in the cooperative, mutual and non-profit sector) to provide financial or bank guarantees and, if so, on what terms?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-3624/97, E-3625/97, E-3626/97, E-3627/97, E-3628/97, E-3629/97, E-3630/97, E-3631/97, E-3632/97, E-3633/97, E-3634/97, E-3635/97, E-3636/97 and E-3637/97 given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission (30 January 1998)

The Commission has no information on the obligation imposed by Member States on non-profit organisations to provide a bank guarantee in order to gain access to funding under the various Community programmes. This is a matter of national law.

As regards the granting of subsidies under the Employment initiative, it is up to the national authorities which sign the agreements with the project promoters to require bank guarantees in accordance with the national rules in force. In Austria, Germany, Greece, Portugal and Spain, such guarantees are not normally required from potential promoters to gain access to the Employment initiative.

While it is true that the provision of a bank guarantee may be an additional burden, particularly for enterprises operating in the context of the social economy, it is nonetheless true that this is essential when the consequences of failing to fulfil a contractual obligation may exceed the debtor's financial means.

The Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities of 21 December 1977 ((OJ L 356, 31.12.1977. )), as last amended ((OJ L 240, 7.6.1995. )), requires the provision of security by contractors when very large contracts are awarded or when subsidies are granted for the performance of projects involving high sums. However, the majority of non-profit associations are rarely affected by this obligation, given the small scale of the projects they propose.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-4020/97 by Panayotis Lambrias (PPE) to the Commission (14 January 1998)

Subject: Lead in drinking water

The World Health Organization has dramatically reduced the permissible level of lead in drinking water. Will the Commission say what measures it proposes to take to help Member States reduce the quantities of lead in drinking water as rapidly as possible and to provide widespread information for local government bodies and, more generally, for the people of Europe in view of the hazard lead poses for human health, especially that of infants and children.

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (18 February 1998)

In its proposal ((OJ C 131, 30.5.1995. )) for revision of Council Directive 80/778/EEC of 15 July 1980 relating to the quality of water intended for human consumption ((OJ L 229, 30.8.1980. )) (the drinking water directive) the Commission adopted the value recommended by the World health organisation (WHO) of 10 microgrammes per litre (10 ìg/l) for lead. This standard was accepted by the Parliament (first reading on 12 December 1996) and in the common position of the Council (No 12767/97) on the proposed directive, which was adopted on 19 December 1997.

Once the directive is adopted, in principle during 1998, its implementation is the responsibility of the Member States. Given the important financial and practical consequences, exceptionally for lead, Member States will have fifteen years, instead of the five years general timetable, to comply with the parametric value of 10 ìg/l. Between five and fifteen years the interim standard will be 25 ìg/l instead of 50 ìg/l which is the present standard for lead.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3628/97 by Luciano Vecchi (PSE) to the Commission (13 November 1997)

Subject: Guarantees required in respect of participation in the employment initiative in France

As has already been pointed out in earlier questions, the Italian authorities' decision to require non-profit-making undertakings to provide bank guarantees in order to participate in employment initiatives has proved costly and punitive for undertakings which obviously have difficulty in providing financial guarantees of their own.

Given that such matters are subject to different regulations in the various Member States of the Union, would the Commission state whether France requires non-profit-making undertakings (and, in general, firms in the cooperative, mutual and non-profit sector) to provide financial or bank guarantees and, if so, on what terms?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-3624/97, E-3625/97, E-3626/97, E-3627/97, E-3628/97, E-3629/97, E-3630/97, E-3631/97, E-3632/97, E-3633/97, E-3634/97, E-3635/97, E-3636/97 and E-3637/97 given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission (30 January 1998)

The Commission has no information on the obligation imposed by Member States on non-profit organisations to provide a bank guarantee in order to gain access to funding under the various Community programmes. This is a matter of national law.

As regards the granting of subsidies under the Employment initiative, it is up to the national authorities which sign the agreements with the project promoters to require bank guarantees in accordance with the national rules in force. In Austria, Germany, Greece, Portugal and Spain, such guarantees are not normally required from potential promoters to gain access to the Employment initiative.

While it is true that the provision of a bank guarantee may be an additional burden, particularly for enterprises operating in the context of the social economy, it is nonetheless true that this is essential when the consequences of failing to fulfil a contractual obligation may exceed the debtor's financial means.

The Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities of 21 December 1977 ((OJ L 356, 31.12.1977. )), as last amended ((OJ L 240, 7.6.1995. )), requires the provision of security by contractors when very large contracts are awarded or when subsidies are granted for the performance of projects involving high sums. However, the majority of non-profit associations are rarely affected by this obligation, given the small scale of the projects they propose.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3804/97 by José Apolinário (PSE) to the Commission (26 November 1997)

Subject: European Social Fund and tourism

In view of the Commission's reply to my question E-2036/97 ((OJ C 391, 23.12.1997, p. 151. )) on the breakdown of ERDF activity by Member State, can the Commission provide me with the same information with regard to the European Social Fund, namely the sums assigned to tourism within the various operational programmes in each of the Community support frameworks in each of the Member States?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (30 January 1998)

The Commission is sending direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat a table containing the information requested.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3632/97 by Luciano Vecchi (PSE) to the Commission (13 November 1997)

Subject: Guarantees required in respect of participation in the employment initiative in Luxembourg

As has already been pointed out in earlier questions, the Italian authorities' decision to require non-profit-making undertakings to provide bank guarantees in order to participate in employment initiatives has proved costly and punitive for undertakings which obviously have difficulty in providing financial guarantees of their own.

Given that such matters are subject to different regulations in the various Member States of the Union, would the Commission state whether Luxembourg requires non-profit-making undertakings (and, in general, firms in the cooperative, mutual and non-profit sector) to provide financial or bank guarantees and, if so, on what terms?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-3624/97, E-3625/97, E-3626/97, E-3627/97, E-3628/97, E-3629/97, E-3630/97, E-3631/97, E-3632/97, E-3633/97, E-3634/97, E-3635/97, E-3636/97 and E-3637/97 given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission (30 January 1998)

The Commission has no information on the obligation imposed by Member States on non-profit organisations to provide a bank guarantee in order to gain access to funding under the various Community programmes. This is a matter of national law.

As regards the granting of subsidies under the Employment initiative, it is up to the national authorities which sign the agreements with the project promoters to require bank guarantees in accordance with the national rules in force. In Austria, Germany, Greece, Portugal and Spain, such guarantees are not normally required from potential promoters to gain access to the Employment initiative.

While it is true that the provision of a bank guarantee may be an additional burden, particularly for enterprises operating in the context of the social economy, it is nonetheless true that this is essential when the consequences of failing to fulfil a contractual obligation may exceed the debtor's financial means.

The Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities of 21 December 1977 ((OJ L 356, 31.12.1977. )), as last amended ((OJ L 240, 7.6.1995. )), requires the provision of security by contractors when very large contracts are awarded or when subsidies are granted for the performance of projects involving high sums. However, the majority of non-profit associations are rarely affected by this obligation, given the small scale of the projects they propose.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3877/97 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (5 December 1997)

Subject: Vertical restraints in competition policy

The Commission's Green Paper on vertical restraints in EC competition policy (COM(96) 721 final) examines the current economic and legal situation with regard to vertical restraints and the findings of a survey on the subject. It also deals with the issue of market integration and questions more closely linked with competition.

Will the Commission provide clarification and ensure coordination with its communication on agreements of lesser importance (COM(96) 722 final) and the options set out in the Green Paper, particularly option IV, which provides for a rebuttable presumption of compatibility with Article 85 for a market share of less than 20%?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission (28 January 1998)

On 22 January 1997 the Commission adopted a green paper on vertical restraints in Community competition policy. The aim of the green paper is to undertake a fundamental review of policy towards vertical restraints. It also launched a wide ranging consultation exercise by requesting written comments from interested parties by 31 July 1997. This exercise involved the Commission in numerous presentations, speeches and meetings with interested bodies. On 18 July 1997 the Parliament adopted a Resolution on the green paper. Opinions were also adopted by the Economic and social committee and the Committee of the regions on 9 July 1997 and 12 June 1997 respectively. The consultation exercise culminated on 6 and 7 October 1997 with a hearing, at which representatives of industry, interested organisations, the Parliament, the Economic and social committee and Member States were present. The Commission is in the process of formulating its own position in reaction to the information, submissions and opinions received during the consultation exercise.

The green paper contains a number of possible options for the future thrust of policy towards vertical restraints. However these options are not exhaustive and a number of other possible options arose during the consultation process.

The Commission notes the similarities between the negative clearance presumption in option IV of the green paper and the concept of 'de minimis' as defined in the notice of the Commission relating to the revision of the notice of 3 September 1986 on agreements of minor importance which are not caught by the provisions of Article 85(1) of the EC Treaty ((COM(96) 722 final. )).

It is as yet too early to comment on the outcome of the green paper, but the Commission notes the need for co-ordination between the Commission's notice on agreements of minor importance, and any future policy proposal in this area.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3871/97 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (5 December 1997)

Subject: Competitiveness of European industry

With reference to the Commission Communication benchmarking - implementation of an instrument available to economic actors and public authorities (COM(97) 153 final), in measuring the competitiveness of the general reference framework, will the Commission take account of the regional dimension, which makes it possible to identify more effectively factors influencing competitiveness in various sectors, such as support for innovation, human resources development, and dissemination and use of information technologies?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (30 January 1998)

The Commission believes that benchmarking of framework conditions can take place at a number of different levels, including at Community, national and regional level. At the same time, it must be recognised that many policy areas affecting competitiveness, in particular as regards the regional dimension, are the responsibility of Member States.

It is for this reason that Member States are playing the lead role, with the close co-operation of the Commission, in the implementation of the pilot projects in the areas of financing of innovation, development of human resources and diffusion and utilisation of information technologies.

In the case of economic and social cohesion, it is already the case that regional development programmes co-financed by the Community in principle contain quantified targets based on analysis of inter-regional differences in economic performance and competitiveness. The effectiveness of the programmes ex post is then assessed against the quantified targets established initially.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3409/97 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission (28 October 1997)

Subject: Construction of the Castel Sant'Angelo underpass in Rome

The 'Castel Sant'Angelo Underpass' project has now undergone substantial modifications. The original project has been radically changed (it was recognized as being impossible to carry out, whilst work was under way), the estimated cost has risen from 100 to 169 billion lire, and the completion dates have obviously been put back. Whilst the Commission was still awaiting answers from the Italian authorities to its requests concerning the environmental impact assessment of the old project, a similar problem arose in connection with the new project.

In view of this, can the Commission say:

1. whether the new project complies with Directive 85/337/EEC ((OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40.)) on environmental impact assessment, in particular as regards the involvement of the general public in the procedures and respecting and safeguarding the architectural heritage and historic monuments;

2. whether, in view of the increased estimated cost (of this and other projects covered by the Rome 2000 Framework Agreement), the EIB will increase its funding proportionately;

3. whether the delayed completion will jeopardize EIB financing for the project;

4. under what circumstances the EIB might withdraw its funding?

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission (8 December 1997)

The project in question is not one of the investment projects selected by the European Investment Bank (EIB) under its Rome 2000 financing programme. Accordingly, the EIB has not undertaken a preliminary study.

The Commission does not possess any additional information about the project as Member States are not obliged to communicate to it any information regarding environmental impact assessments for every project they plan to carry out.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-4108/97 by Gianfranco Dell'Alba (ARE) to the Commission (16 January 1998)

Subject: Trial for the killing of the Italian Giacomo Turra in Colombia on 3 September 1995

15 December 1997 will see the start of the court-martial at the Military Tribunal in Cartagena, Colombia, which will finally try 5 policemen charged with the manslaughter of the European citizen Giacomo Turra who died there at the age of 24.

After various attempts by the Colombian authorities to have it shelved, the trial is to take place thanks to the intervention not only of the Italian Government but also of numerous international human rights organizations.

The Commission recently granted Colombia $5 million in humanitarian aid in return for an undertaking to improve compliance with human rights, and the trial is undoubtedly important proof of the Colombian state's determination to combat the impunity with which it is characterized.

Does the Commission not think it would be an idea to take advantage of the opportunity to send observers to the trial to ascertain that the legal proceedings respect human rights?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission (4 February 1998)

The Commission is watching with some concern the human rights situation in Colombia, which remains unsatisfactory on the whole. It will be keeping a close eye on the trial of Mr Turra's alleged killers through its delegation in Bogotá, in coordination with the Member States' diplomatic representations there.

The Commission assigns top priority to initiatives aimed at strengthening the machinery for protecting human rights in Colombia and to monitoring infringements of those rights. That aim is achieved in three ways: by beefing up the presence of the international community (additional funding of the international observer team made available to the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and responsible for monitoring the human rights situation throughout the country); by financing initiatives for local NGOs working in the field of democracy and human rights; and through structural aid for the administration of justice.

As for the humanitarian aid programme referred to by the Honourable Member, it should be stressed that under the terms of Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/96 of 20 June 1996 concerning humanitarian aid ((OJ L 163, 2.7.1996. )), such aid, given its objective, is not guided by or subject to political considerations.

The other forms of aid Colombia receives from the Commission are largely targeted at the most disadvantaged sections of the population. The Commission enlists the help of a large number of local and international NGOs in implementing its aid.

It should be stressed that Colombia is signatory to a regional cooperation agreement with the Community which subjects Community aid to observance of human rights.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-3756/97 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (17 November 1997)

Subject: The Kurds and political asylum

The Kurds are neither bandits nor infiltrators and the refugees who have been arriving in Italy (those of Kurdish origin, at least) have created problems at international level as regards political asylum. We cannot ignore the fact that the men in question, who are being assailed and pursued in a secret war which (unfortunately for them) has little impact on civilian society, are oppressed (often violently) and cannot live peaceably on either Iraqi, Iranian, Syrian or Turkish territory.

If the Kurds do not deserve refugee status, who does deserve it?

No international organization is willing to take the initial step, even on purely humanitarian grounds - a shameful situation which Europe should be the first to remedy.

Given that Europe needs to give some consideration to the meaning, in a civilized society, of political asylum and to the need to accommodate new arrivals and find work for them within the EU Member States, and since, following the conclusion of the Schengen agreements, Puglia must now be regarded as a European, rather than an Italian border, could the Council and the Commission ensure that the serious problem of the Kurds vis-à-vis Europe is dealt with as a matter of urgency, with the immediate involvement of the UN Security Council?

It should be borne in mind that ignoring the 'Kurdish question' is likely to make matters worse, by causing the Kurds to flee to other European countries or by provoking a dangerous armed conflict on a distrastrous scale which will be impossible to control.

Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (10 December 1997)

The question of granting refugee status to asylum seekers in the Member States is the competence of Member States. Nevertheless, a joint position on the harmonised application of the definition of the term 'refugee' in Article 1 of the 1951 Geneva Convention ((Joint position of 4 March 1996 defined by the Council on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union on the harmonised application of the definition of the term 'refugee' in Article 1 of the Geneva convention of 28 July 1951 relating to the status of refugee (OJ L 63, 13.3.1996). )), to which the Honourable Member could usefully refer, has been adopted within in the framework of the cooperation in the fields of justice and home affairs under Title VI of the Treaty on European union.

The very question of people coming from Iraq was raised at the General affairs Council on 6 October 1997, as well as at a meeting of Justice and home affairs ministers in Mondorf on 9-10 October 1997. It is now under examination in the relevant groups of the Council.