do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3538/95 by Carmen FRAGA ESTÉVEZ to the Commission. Panama Declaration
Date: 1996-01-03
Institutions: European Parliament, FRAGA ESTEVEZ
Subjects: authorised catch, common fisheries policy, fishing area, fishing net, fishing regulations, marine mammal, protected species, protection of animal life, sea fish













EUR-Lex - 91995E3538 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91995E3538

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3538/95 by Carmen FRAGA ESTÉVEZ to the Commission. Panama Declaration  


Official Journal C 185 , 25/06/1996 P. 0033 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-3538/95 by Carmen Fraga Estévez (PPE) to the Commission (3 January 1996)Subject: Panama DeclarationOn 4 October 1995 the Governments of France and Spain, together with those of a number of third countries, expressed their support for the Panama Declaration. It appears that this agreement might lead to a number of countries, including the United States, lifting the ban on importing tuna caught in tuna fishing grounds with surrounding nets, a method which kills dolphins. Given that France and Spain have made signing of the Declaration conditional on Community fisheries legislation, what is the Commission's official position on the Panama Declaration?Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (19 February 1996)The Commission is aware that fishing for tuna with purse-seine carries a risk of incidental catches of dolphins. For this reason, the Commission proposed in 1992 an amendment of Regulation 3094/86 ((Council Regulation (EEC) n° 3094/86 of 7 October 1986 laying down certain technical measures for the conservation of fishery resources - OJ L 288, 11.10.1986. )) to prohibit Community vessels from carrying out encirclements where groups of dolphins are present (Article 9.17 of the above mentioned regulation).The Panama Declaration was agreed within the Inter-American tropical tuna commission (IATTC) of which France is a full member and Spain is an observer. The Community is not a member.So far as the signature of the Panama Declaration is concerned, the Commission considers that there is no incompatibility between the IATTC rules concerning incidental catches of dolphins and Article 9.17 of the regulation.The Commission has however addressed itself to the Member States concerned asking for further information, taking into account the Community's competence in trade and fisheries matters.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3468/95 by Martina GREDLER , Elly PLOOIJ-VAN GORSEL to the Council. Review of the Euratom Treaty
Date: 1996-01-03
Institutions: European Parliament, GREDLER, PLOOIJ-VAN GORSEL
Subjects: Council of the European Union, EAEC Treaty, nuclear industry













EUR-Lex - 91995E3468 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91995E3468

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3468/95 by Martina GREDLER , Elly PLOOIJ-VAN GORSEL to the Council. Review of the Euratom Treaty  


Official Journal C 305 , 15/10/1996 P. 0003 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-3468/95 by Martina Gredler (ELDR) and Elly Plooij-van Gorsel (ELDR) to the Council (3 January 1996)Subject: Review of the Euratom TreatyThe preamble to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom) is worded in terms that are no longer appropriate in this day and age. Scarcely anyone today still considers that 'nuclear energy represents an essential resource for the development and invigoration of industry', or that it 'will permit the advancement of the cause of peace'. Nor is it any longer a concern of most Member States or their peoples to 'create the conditions necessary for the development of a powerful nuclear industry'.Can the Council still identify today with the wording of the preamble expressing the motives of the parties to the original treaty in concluding a treaty at that time?If not, will the Council give consideration to undertaking a review of the Euratom Treaty - say by integrating such provisions of that Treaty as are still relevant today into the EC Treaty?Is consideration being given to placing a review of the Euratom Treaty on the agenda of the 1996 Intergovernmental Conference?Reply (2 August 1996)The Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community has enabled the Council to continue its proceedings as normal under the existing provisions of that Treaty.Only the Intergovernmental Conference can decide to review the Euratom Treaty, and that would require unanimity. The questions of a review of that Treaty has been raised by a number of Member States.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3438/95 by José ESCUDERO to the Council. Second language at school-leaving certificate level
Date: 1996-01-03
Institutions: ESCUDERO, European Parliament
Subjects: action programme, foreign language, language teaching, secondary education













EUR-Lex - 91995E3438 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91995E3438

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3438/95 by José ESCUDERO to the Council. Second language at school-leaving certificate level  


Official Journal C 280 , 25/09/1996 P. 0002 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-3438/95 by José Escudero (PPE) to the Council (3 January 1996)Subject: Second language at school-leaving certificate levelDoes the Council intend to take any steps to encourage the study of a second language at school-leaving certificate level in countries where this is not compulsory?Given that English has turned into the Esperanto of Europe, does the Council believe that the study of a further language should be encouraged amongst younger students? Will it be taking steps in this connection?Does it plan to take any measures which would be effective in the short term, such as encouraging the teaching of frontier languages in the appropriate schools?Reply (25 June 1996)Acting on the basis of Article 126 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, the Parliament and the Council adopted a Decision establishing the action programme 'Socrates' on 14 March 1995; bearing in mind the second paragraph of that Article, which deals with the teaching and dissemination of the languages of the Member States, the Socrates programme's objectives include promoting a quantitative and qualitative improvement of the knowledge of the languages of the European Union. The programme contains many activities along these lines.Building on the Socrates programme, the Council adopted a Resolution ((OJ No C 207, 12.8.1995, pp. 1 to 5. )) on language learning and teaching on 31 March 1995, which states, as the Honourable Member would wish, that 'pupils should as a general rule have the opportunity of learning two languages of the Union other than their mother tongue(s) for a minimum of two consecutive years and if possible for a longer period'. The Commission was invited to support action by Member States aimed at that objective, and the other objectives mentioned.It should be noted that neither the Socrates programme nor the abovementioned Resolution specify which particular languages should be studied; however, some stress is laid on the Union languages which are less widely used or less frequently taught.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3324/95 by Jesús CABEZÓN ALONSO to the Council. Indigenous peoples and the UN
Date: 1996-01-03
Institutions: CABEZON ALONSO, European Parliament
Subjects: European political cooperation, UNO, human rights, report













EUR-Lex - 91995E3324 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91995E3324

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3324/95 by Jesús CABEZÓN ALONSO to the Council. Indigenous peoples and the UN  


Official Journal C 185 , 25/06/1996 P. 0005 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-3324/95 by Jesús Cabezón Alonso (PSE) to the Council (3 January 1996)Subject: Indigenous peoples and the UNDoes the Council know if the final document by the UN working party on the human rights of indigenous peoples, drawn up after several years of work and consultation, is to be included on the agenda of the forthcoming UN General Assembly?Reply (20 May 1996)1. The final document to which the Honourable Member refers was prepared by a group of independent experts under the auspices of the Sub-Committee on Human Rights. The work of that group of experts did not involve Governments.2. Growing international concern about the problems of indigenous peoples led the United Nations Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR) to decide at its 1995 annual session to set up an intergovernmental working group to investigate, between States, the issue of the human rights of indigenous peoples. This intergovernmental working group held its first meeting in Geneva in November 1995 and agreed to base its work on the independent experts' document. An interim report will be submitted to this year's session of the UNCHR (from 18 March to 26 April), which will be required to decide on the pace and timetable of the intergovernmental working group's further proceedings.3. The matter cannot be referred to the UN General Assembly until the complex discussions taking place in both the working group and the UNCHR have reached a stage permitting the latter to make recommendations via ECOSOC to the General Assembly.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3532/95 by Carole TONGUE to the Council. Transfer of sentenced persons
Date: 1996-01-03
Institutions: European Parliament, TONGUE
Subjects: European convention, France, criminal law, customs debt, drug traffic, enforcement of ruling, transfer of prisoners













EUR-Lex - 91995E3532 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91995E3532

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3532/95 by Carole TONGUE to the Council. Transfer of sentenced persons  


Official Journal C 356 , 25/11/1996 P. 0002 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-3532/95 by Carole Tongue (PSE) to the Council (3 January 1996)Subject: Transfer of sentenced personsIs the Council aware that people imprisoned in France for drug offences are unable to have their sentences transferred to their home country until the payment of the outstanding customs fine? Is this normal practice and how many other Member States, under the Convention on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons, will not agree to transfers where customs debts are outstanding?Joint Reply to Written Questions E-1817/95, E-1818/95 and E-3532/95 (10 October 1996)1. The Council has not been called upon to comment on the application by the Member States in certain specific cases, including the one raised by the Honourable Member, of the Convention on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons, which was concluded at the Council of Europe in 1983.The Council therefore has no information enabling it to say to what extent Member States might or might not have refused the transfer of sentenced persons in certain particular circumstances.2. The Council is, however, considering the possibility of examining and adjusting the instruments that exist with regard to judicial cooperation in criminal matters, including those concerning the enforcement of foreign judgments.