ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3982/97 by Kenneth Coates (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (14 January 1998)

Subject: Passenger rail services between Britain and continental Europe

How much European Union funding has helped to pay for the development of the Channel Tunnel and the associated rail links? How much investment was made by the European Coal and Steel Community?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-3982/97 and E-3983/97 given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission (23 February 1998)

The Community has provided support for the development of the Channel Tunnel and its associated rail links in the United Kingdom and France through numerous financial instruments since 1982.

In 1983, the Community provided 0.4 MECU towards the costs of the preliminary evaluation studies of the Eurotunnel project. In 1987, the European investment bank (EIB) advanced a loan to Eurotunnel of 1.400 MECU towards the costs of the project itself. It has since lent a further 254.4 MECU.

In the United Kingdom the development of the high speed train link between London and the tunnel was identified as a priority project under the Trans-European Networks provisions of the EC Treaty. To support the necessary preparatory works, including those on the existing London-Folkestone route, the Community has granted Union Railways (now wholly owned by London and Continental Railways plc) a total of just over 121 MECU to date, as follows:

>TABLE>

In the period 1989-97, the Community allocated 139.65 MECU to the development of the Paris-Brussels-Koln-Amsterdam-London (PBKAL) High Speed Train Link, and 0.5 MECU towards the development of the same link in France.

The EIB also has lent over 1900 MECU towards the development of the links to the tunnel. These loans comprise 118.9 MECU in 1996 to European Passenger Services Ltd (also now owned by London and Continental Railways plc), towards the first phase of the new high speed link between London and the Channel tunnel; 884 MECU in 1990-1994 to Société nationale des chemins de fer français (SNCF) for the TGV Nord; and 928.5 MECU in 1993-1997 to Société nationale des Chemins de fer belges (SNCB) for the construction of the line from the French border to Brussels.

In February 1991, the Commission decided, in accordance with the unanimous Council assent, to give the tunnel project a European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) loan of up to 285 MECU, towards the use of European steel in the project. Following that decision, some 240 MECU (GBP 197 million) has now been advanced to Eurotunnel for the project. The ECSC has also contributed, in 1991 and 1992, 115 MECU to the financing of the TGV Nord (France) and 40 MECU to the financing of the TGV French border-Brussels (Belgium).

Unlike transport infrastructure, transport services are not eligible for support from Community funds and no resources have therefore been provided to support Eurostar rail services. The Commission does, however, anticipate adequate through-services to be provided on the Trans-European Network rail infrastructure which is being developed with Community financial support, as detailed above.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-4025/97 by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission (14 January 1998)

Subject: Financial instruments for regional policy funds

When does the Commission envisage starting studies into possible use of new financial instruments to provide funds for regional policy?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (12 March 1998)

In the context of Agenda 2000 and the revision of the current structural funds regulations for the period after 1999, the Commission is undertaking a number of studies on the possibilities of using new financial instruments. It will prepare a report on future cohesion policy support and the use of different financial assistance instruments, with particular attention to the idea that, in the future, financial support should strike a more judicious balance between grant aid and other types of funding, such as loans (with or without interest subsidies), loan guarantees or equity participation, depending on the nature of the investment at hand.

The Commission will consider how the grant financing aid element of structural funds interventions might be partly replaced, or used to leverage other (eg private) resources, to reduce the burden on the Community budget but still achieve the cohesion impact desired. As part of this exercise, a study on the impact of financial engineering measures within a selected number of existing European regional development fund programmes is currently under way.

After a policy appraisal within the Commission, discussions with the European investment bank (EIB), European investment fund and selected institutions in Member States are expected to develop technically the different schemes which may be identified. The outcome of these studies and discussions will take into account the new mandate given to the EIB, following the Amsterdam European Council, to encourage small and medium sized enterprises (SME) development, possibly making use of venture capital with involvement of the private banking sector.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-4179/97 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE) to the Commission (21 January 1998)

Subject: Cohesion policy and culture

Both the Council (in its Decision of 30 June 1997) and the Commission (statement made in Decision No 2228/97/EC ((OJ L 305, 8.11.1997, p. 31. )) establishing a Community action programme in the field of cultural heritage (the Raphael programme)) advocated the creation of a framework instrument for culture. The Commission confirmed its intention to submit a proposal for a comprehensive programme as soon as possible.

Can the Commission supply information about the timetable, objectives, guidelines and content of the future framework programme 'Culture' which is the subject of the proposal?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (16 March 1998)

In accordance with the Council Decision of 22 September 1997 on the future of European cultural action ((OJ C 305, 7.10.1997. )), the Commission will present proposals by 1 May 1998 for establishing a single instrument for programming and financing aimed at implementing Article 128 of the EC Treaty.

With a view to drafting a framework programme in support of culture the Commission launched a large consultation exercise, which took the form of a call for contributions from interested parties and a European Union Cultural Forum, held on 29 and 30 January 1998 and attended by Members of Parliament, representatives of the Member States, the Committee of the Regions and the arts.

These contributions are now being examined, and the proposals based upon them will be finalised very soon.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-4075/97 by Concepció Ferrer (PPE) to the Commission (14 January 1998)

Subject: SMUs and the extraordinary Council meeting in Luxembourg

The Commission did not include representatives of small and medium-sized undertakings in the preparation of its guidelines for the extraordinary European Council on employment. SMUs are, however, having to face particular challenges as a result of economic globalization. SMUs also have an important role to play in the Union in job creation. Can the Commission state what measures it intends to take to include SMUs in the preparation of policies concerning them?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (12 March 1998)

Several European social partner organisations with small and medium-sized enterprises (SME) membership took part in the process leading up to the adoption of the 1998 employment guidelines. As members of the standing committee on employment, or as part of the employers' delegation to the informal meetings between the social partners and the steering group of the employment and labour market committee, the main European organisations' representatives for SMEs had the occasion to express their views on the content of the guidelines and their contributions to the process.

The social partners at all levels have been given explicit roles in the implementation of the employment guidelines. The Commission communication of 1 October 1997 on the employment guidelines ((COM(97) 497 final. )), the European Council conclusions from the extraordinary summit on employment in Luxembourg 20-21 November 1997 and the Council Resolution of 15 December 1997 on the 1998 employment guidelines all emphasised that the social partners at all levels will be involved and will have their contribution to make to the implementation of the guidelines, especially those relating to adaptability and employability within the Community.

The Member States are currently preparing these employment action plans and the social partners are expected to play an important role in the process. At European level the meetings of the above mentioned committees will continue to provide for a dialogue, and, furthermore the Commission will continue to consult the social partners on policy and legislative proposals in the social policy field including the initiatives emerging from the employment process.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3904/97 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Council (10 December 1997)

Subject: Tourist massacre in Egypt

In the wake of the massacre of tourists in the Valley of Queens in Egypt at the hands of Islamist terrorists organized along the lines of a full-scale revolutionary army, Europe cannot postpone the following decisions:

1. to assist President Mubarak's government in taking drastic and resolute action against terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism;

2. to obtain guarantees of the safety of all those visiting Egypt for the purposes of business or tourism in order to ensure that it retains its links to the West;

3. to protect the architectural and cultural heritage of Egypt, whose history belongs to and must be safeguarded by the international community as a whole.

Will the Council say what specific measures it intends to promote in order to combat collusion in the EU Member States between international terrorist groups, specifically Islamist terrorists?

Answer (28 May 1998)

1. The Council condemns terrorism in any form and supports Egypt in its fight against it.

2. The internal and external threats posed by terrorism to the European Union are regularly reviewed by the Council bodies. On 15 October 1996, the Council adopted a Joint Action concerning the creation and maintenance of a Directory of specialized counter-terrorist competences, skills and expertise to facilitate counter-terrorist cooperation between the Member States of the European Union ((OJ L 273, 25.10.1996, p. 1. )).

On the basis of the arrangements concluded for the exchange of operational information in this area, meetings and seminars are regularly held to help combat all aspects of terrorism.

3. In the light of the expected entry into force of the Europol Convention, the Council agreed on 19 March 1998 to take a decision on the extension of the mandate of Europol to cover the fight against terrorism as soon as possible after Europol takes up its activities (Article 2 of the Convention).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-4068/97 by Daniela Raschhofer (NI) to the Commission (14 January 1998)

Subject: Report of the Court of Auditors

The Annual Report of the Court of Auditors concerning the financial year 1996, volume I, contains a statement, on page 351, second column, that there are doubts as to compliance with the rules for granting subsidies provided for in Article A-304. In this connection reference is made to an association which regularly receives significant funds from the Community budget.

Which association is being referred to here?

Who is the authorized representative of that association?

What projects were being subsidized?

What are the objects of that association?

What measures have been taken to put right the abuses noted in this case?

Have the misused funds been recovered?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (10 March 1998)

The association is the European Movement, International Secretariat. The President of the European Movement is Mr Soares. The Secretary General is Mr Dastoli.

The grant is intended to cover the organisation's programme of activities to promote the idea of European integration and to enable it to act as a network resource for national organisations of the European Movement.

The Commission's financial controller carried out audits of the organisation in 1996 and 1997 and is satisfied that the situation has been put right. An amount of ECU 145 330 has been recovered and the grant specified by the budget authority for 1998 is now ECU 300 000.

The Commission would point out that, as in many cases of recurring grants, the beneficiary and the amount are specified as such in the budget by the budget authority.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-4131/97 by Wayne David (PSE) to the Commission (5 January 1998)

Subject: Protection of children

Can the Commission indicate if it plans to introduce any initiatives to protect children from accidents?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (2 February 1998)

In addressing the general problem of child safety, the Community has already put in place a regulatory framework designed to ensure a rapid, reasonable and consistent response to the problems encountered.

On the one hand, there are specific harmonised rules for certain products (such as toys ((Directive 88/378/EEC, OJ L 187, 16.7.1988. )) and dangerous imitations of foodstuffs ((Directive 87/357/EEC, OJ L 192, 11.7.1987. ))) and, on the other, horizontal rules designed to create a genuine general safety requirement applicable to consumer products, focusing notably on the safety of products intended for children (the Directive on general product safety ((Directive 92/59/EEC, OJ L 228, 11.8.1992. ))) and professional liability (the Directive on liability for defective products ((Directive 85/374/EEC, OJ L 210, 7.8.1985. ))).

In the case of certain categories of products that present particular safety problems, the Commission regularly issues standardisation mandates to the European standardisation bodies. For example, in 1997 accidents involving children prompted the Commission to issue mandates on decorative oil lamps and childcare articles.

In parallel, on 14 May 1997 the Commission adopted a Communication on injury prevention and a Proposal for a European Parliament and Council Decision ((OJ C 202, 2.7.1997. )) adopting a programme of Community action from 1999 to 2003 on injury prevention in the context of the framework for action in the field of public health. This proposal is now being examined by Parliament and Council in the framework of the co-decision procedure.

One of the programme's objectives is to contribute to public health activities which seek to reduce the incidence of injury in home, school and leisure accidents, mainly involving children and young adults, by promoting the more effective dissemination and application of prevention techniques whose worth is widely accepted by experts.

Moreover, Ehlass (the European Home and Leisure Accidents Surveillance System) sets out precise guidelines and actions at Community level.

Apart from legislation, measures are also taken in the field of information, prevention and education. Likewise, Commission-subsidised awareness-raising and information campaigns may also be mounted in the Member States.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0074/98 by Stéphane Buffetaut (I-EDN) and Françoise Seillier (I-EDN) to the Council (30 January 1998)

Subject: New Article 13 (ex 6A) of the Draft Treaty

The new Article 13 of the Draft Treaty on European Union lays down that 'the Council ... may take appropriate action to combat discrimination based on ... sexual orientation'.

At a time when crimes of a sexual nature, particularly against children, and the sexual exploitation of human beings are justly condemned and action is being taken to combat them, particularly by the European Parliament in its recent resolutions (B4-0954, 0968, 0980 and 0990/97 of 20 November 1997; A4-0306/97 of 6 November 1997 and A4-0372/97 of 16 December 1997), does the Council consider it wise to create an imprecisely defined protected category which might be relied upon by persons who are suspected, for example, of paedophilia and who have been banned, at least temporarily, from all contact with children?

Since this same article provides for measures to combat discrimination based on sex, what were the Council's reasons for adding this new wording?

Does the Council propose to correct the imprecision of the term 'sexual orientation' in this context or to leave things as they are?

Answer (23 March 1998)

As the Honourable Members know, the Council has no authority to amend or correct the text of the Treaties ((The Council understands the reference made in the Written Question to the new Article13 of the draft TEU as being a reference to Article 13 of the TEC as renumbered by the Treaty of Amsterdam. )).

Nevertheless, the Council would point out that it will take measures under Article 13 which it considers appropriate, acting by unanimity after consultation of the European Parliament.

The Council firmly condemns violence against, and sexual exploitation of, children, and has taken appropriate measures under Title VI of the Treaty on European Union. These include the joint action of 16 December 1996 extending the mandate given to the Europol Drugs Unit ((OJ L 342, 31.12.1996, p. 4. )); the joint action of 29 November 1996 establishing an incentive and exchange programme for persons responsible for combating trade in human beings and the sexual exploitation of children the STOP programme ((OJ L 322, 12.12.1996, p. 7. )), and the joint action of 24 February 1997 concerning action to combat trafficking in human beings and sexual exploitation of children ((OJ L 63, 4. 3.1997, p. 2. ));
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0057/98 by Alex Smith (PSE) to the Commission (29 January 1998)

Subject: Trade and cooperation agreement between the EU and South Africa

The EU is currently negotiating a trade and cooperation agreement with South Africa. The agreement will be crucial for the future of South Africa. It is therefore important to make sure that all sectors of society, and especially the more vulnerable groups, benefit from the agreement.

The biggest vulnerable group are women. How is the Commission going to make sure that the agreement, and especially its trade section, will not adversely affect women in South Africa? Will impact studies on the effects of the agreement on women be drawn up? Would the Commission be prepared to support South Africa financially if it drew up such studies?

In particular, will the Commission review the impact of EU imports on local products which are often traded in the region by small-scale women traders? Will there be an exemption for these products which provide a large number of women with an income in the informal sector?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0057/98 and E-0058/98 given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission (12 February 1998)

Gender issue is a priority in the Commission's development policy, and the South African government is committed to promote gender issues and to monitor progress in this area. There is no doubt that this will be mentioned and underlined in the text of the 'Development cooperation' and 'Cooperation in other areas' chapters of the agreement. The Commission will favour provisions promoting the role of women in the fields suggested by the Honourable Member. Therefore, the agreement will benefit women.

The negotiators do not foresee in the agreement any obligation to launch studies, but the Commission is committed to assessing the impact on women of any development programme already launched under the current European programme for reconstruction and development in South Africa (EPRD) programme, and which will be launched in the future.

The agreement will also contain provisions on the follow-up of cooperation between the Community and South African activities. Concerning development cooperation in the framework of the EPRD, the Commission holds annual consultations with the South Africa government where results and achievements of on-going programmes are reviewed, and this practice will be maintained under the future agreement. When it comes to assessing specific programmes, the Commission usually takes into account the views of the beneficiaries. Therefore, when appropriate, the assessment of the impact on women will be done with womens' representatives.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0043/98 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE) to the Commission (15 January 1998)

Subject: Moroccan failure to comply with the fisheries agreement with the EU

The Kingdom of Morocco's unilateral decision to extend the biological rest period for cephalopods to four months in 1998 infringes the provisions of the current fisheries agreement with the EU. Moreover, it is a known fact that Morocco does not respect the cephalopod breeding areas within the 12 mile limit, so that as a means of conserving resources, the supposed biological rest periods are no more than pseudo-measures.

What steps has the Commission already taken, and what further steps does it intend to take to prevent the Moroccan authorities from violating the current fisheries agreement in this way?

Should the measure go ahead, what will the political, economic and commercial effects on EU relations with the Kingdom of Morocco, and in particular, what legal and financial consequences will there be as far as the fisheries agreement is concerned?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (12 February 1998)

The Community has always accorded the greatest importance to conservation and rational management of fishery resources. The Agreement with Morocco involves a commitment by the Community to apply, in concert with its partner, a policy safeguarding the long-term viability of the sector, in particular of the cephalopod fishery, which is of recognised importance to the fleets of both parties.

The Commission considers that a biological rest period is only one of a range of protective measures for this resource. It is not opposed to the basic idea of doubling the rest period specified in the Agreement.

Such a measure must however be set within the context of implementation of the conservation measures to which Morocco has committed itself. These must, in the interests of both parties, extend to both its industrial and non-industrial fleets fishing cephalopods. This was the position defended by the Community when the Joint Committee met on 3 and 4 December 1997.

As regards Morocco's unilateral extension of the biological rest period, the Commission, in line with the declaration on fisheries relations with Morocco adopted by the Council on 18 December 1997, is pressing on with its efforts to secure compliance with the undertakings entered into.