do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 420/96 by Nikitas KAKLAMANIS to the Council. Recognition of Imia as Greek
Date: 1996-02-29
Institutions: European Parliament, KAKLAMANIS
Subjects: Aegean Islands, Greece, International Court of Justice, Türkiye, pacifism, territorial law













EUR-Lex - 91996E0420 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0420

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 420/96 by Nikitas KAKLAMANIS to the Council. Recognition of Imia as Greek  


Official Journal C 280 , 25/09/1996 P. 0029 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0420/96 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Council (29 February 1996)Subject: Recognition of Imia as GreekAgence Europe No.6659 of 3 February 1996 published a statement by the spokesman for the Italian Presidency saying that the Italian Presidency of the European Union agrees with the Greek view that Imia is Greek.Does the Council of Ministers of the EU share the view expressed by the Italian Presidency?Joint Reply (25 June 1996)The General Affairs Council discussed the situation in the Aegean in February and expressed concern at the recent developments, which affect the Union as a whole and its relations with Turkey.The Presidency of the Council called on the parties to continue to exercise restraint and to refrain from any action liable to increase tension and from any demonstration of armed force.The Presidency of the Council also encouraged Greece and Turkey to establish between them a crisis-prevention mechanism and considered that the dispute and the territorial issues should be settled solely by the process of law, i.e. by the International Court of Justice.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 447/96 by Anneli HULTHÉN to the Commission. Public access to documents
Date: 1996-02-29
Institutions: European Parliament, HULTHEN
Subjects: EC Decision, European Commission, Sweden, proposal (EU), right to information













EUR-Lex - 91996E0447 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0447

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 447/96 by Anneli HULTHÉN to the Commission. Public access to documents  


Official Journal C 217 , 26/07/1996 P. 0043 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0447/96 by Anneli Hulthén (PSE) to the Commission (29 February 1996)Subject: Public access to documentsIn May 1995 the Swedish newspaper Journalisten asked the Council for 20 documents concerning Europol, but was given access to only two, while the Swedish authorities handed over 18.Does the Commission consider this to be compatible with the basic principle of the EU that the public should have the greatest possible access to documents of the EU institutions?What steps can the Commission envisage to ensure greater transparency to apply to an equal degree within both the EU institutions and the national administrations?Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (6 May 1996)The Commission attaches utmost importance to transparency, as this is something which brings Europe closer to the people.The Commission would remind the Honourable Member that, on 8 February 1994, it adopted a decision on access to its documents. ((OJ No L 46, 18.2 1994. )) This decision which applies a common code of conduct agreed by the Commission and the Council on 6 December 1993, lays down the principle that the public has the widest possible access to internal Commission documents except where disclosure could jeopardize public or private interests or the confidentiality of its proceedings.With regard to access to Council documents and more particularly to minutes of its meetings, it should be emphasized that, on 2 October 1995, the Council adopted a code of conduct on public access to the minutes and statements in the minutes of the Council acting as legislator. Naturally the Commission welcomed these new measures which ensure greater transparency of its work.For the future, the Commission considers it indispensable to develop the current policy of openness on the basis of the code of conduct, which provides for the policy to be reviewed in the coming weeks after two years' experience. At this juncture, it does not consider it appropriate to submit a proposal for legislation to apply to all Community institutions and the Member States.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 441/96 by Carlo SECCHI to the Commission. Financial aid for projects relating to consumer protection in 1996
Date: 1996-02-29
Institutions: European Parliament, SECCHI
Subjects: EU Official Journal, EU aid, consumer protection, translation













EUR-Lex - 91996E0441 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0441

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 441/96 by Carlo SECCHI to the Commission. Financial aid for projects relating to consumer protection in 1996  


Official Journal C 280 , 25/09/1996 P. 0030 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0441/96 by Carlo Secchi (PPE) to the Commission (29 February 1996)Subject: Financial aid for projects relating to consumer protection in 1996A notice was published in Official Journal C 19 of 23 January 1996 concerning financial aid for projects relating to consumer protection in 1996.In addition to giving details of the priorities and objectives for the projects, the notice states that special forms and explanatory notes regarding subsidy requests can be obtained from the Commission.However, the deadline for submitting requests is 31 January 1996.1. Does the Commission believe that the brief interval between publication of the notice in the Official Journal (23 January) and the deadline (31 January) was sufficient to enable all interested parties in the Union to obtain the necessary information in time to submit a request?2. Were other measures taken prior to publication of the notice in order to inform all or some of those concerned and, if so, what were they?Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission 21 March 1996In order to operate with the highest degree of transparency when granting subsidies, the Commission, on 16 November 1995, sent a text in French and English on the granting of financial aid for projects relating to consumer protection in 1996 to five pan-european consumer organizations EBCU, IEIC, Eurocoop, EURO C and Coface specifically asking them to pass on the information to their members. It then published this text in French, English and German in the form of an article in the December 1995 edition of Info-C, an information bulletin, as well as publishing it in the Official Journal as a communication in all the official Community languages. Due to translation delays at such a particularly busy time of year, it was unfortunately only possible to publish the text in the Official Journal in January 1996. This is why the Commission, despite having received a considerable number of requests in December and January, has decided to extend the deadline until 31 May 1996. A new communication to this effect will shortly appear in the Official Journal.
Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 8/96 of 29 February 1996 amending Annex XIII (Transport) to the EEA Agreement
Date: 1996-02-29
Institutions: EEA Joint Committee
Subjects: European Economic Area, agreement (EU), electronic device, road transport, safety device, transport safety








L_1996102EN.01005101.xml










25.4.1996   


EN


Official Journal of the European Communities


L 102/51





DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE
No 8/96
of 29 February 1996
amending Annex XIII (Transport) to the EEA Agreement
THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,
Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, as adjusted by the Protocol Adjusting the Agreement on the European Economic Area, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Agreement’, and in particular Article 98 thereof,
Whereas Annex XIII to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 60/95 (1);
Whereas Commission Regulation 2479/95 of 25 October 1995 adapting to technical progress Council Regulation (EEC) No 3821/85 on recording equipment in road transport (2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
The following indent shall be added in point 21 (Council Regulation (EEC) No 3821/85) in Annex XIII to the Agreement:






‘—



395 R 2479: Commission Regulation (EC) No 2479/95 of 25 October 1995 (OJ No L 256, 26. 10. 1995, p. 8).’




Article 2
The texts of Regulation (EC) No 2479/95 in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, annexed to the respective language versions of this Decision, are authentic.
Article 3
This Decision shall enter into force on 1 March 1996, provided that all the notifications pursuant to Article 103 (1) of the Agreement have been made to the EEA Joint Committee.
Article 4
This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section, and the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Communities.

Done at Brussels, 29 February 1996.


For the EEA Joint Committee


The President

P. BENAVIDES




(1)  Not yet published in the Official Journal.

(2)  OJ No L 256, 26. 10. 1995, p. 8.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 445/96 by Glyn FORD to the Commission. Free Miners of the Forest of Dean, UK
Date: 1996-02-29
Institutions: European Parliament, FORD
Subjects: United Kingdom, coal mining, competition law, customs and traditions, patents licence, privatisation













EUR-Lex - 91996E0445 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0445

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 445/96 by Glyn FORD to the Commission. Free Miners of the Forest of Dean, UK  


Official Journal C 185 , 25/06/1996 P. 0059 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0445/96 by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission (29 February 1996)Subject: Free Miners of the Forest of Dean, UK'Free Miners' are a traditional group of workers comprising those born in the 'hundred' of St. Briavels in the Forest of Dean, Gloucestershire, England who have worked in the mines for a year and a day. Over seven centuries, since 1283, such people have had the right to mine freely within the Forest. Now a private company wants to impose enormous licensing fees, effectively closing the two remaining mines in the area.Does the Commission not feel such a manoeuvre is in contravention of both tradition and competition rules?Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission (26 March 1996)On the privatisation of the British coal industry responsibility for all licensing coal mining in the United Kingdom was passed to the Coal authority, an independent institution set up by statute.The Commission understands that the free miners in the Forest of Dean have been treated in the same way as other companies or individuals seeking licences to extract coal. It further understands that the Coal authority is considering whether special arrangements could be made for the free miners in view of the extremely small quantities of coal they produce.There appear to be no grounds to conclude that there is any discrimination against the free miners or any other breach of the Community's competition rules.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 464/96 by Alexandros ALAVANOS to the Commission. Environmental protection on the Akamas peninsular in Cyprus
Date: 1996-02-29
Institutions: ALAVANOS, European Parliament
Subjects: Cyprus, biosphere, coastal protection, environmental protection, island region, national park, offence, protected area, protection of animal life, tourist infrastructure













EUR-Lex - 91996E0464 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0464

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 464/96 by Alexandros ALAVANOS to the Commission. Environmental protection on the Akamas peninsular in Cyprus  


Official Journal C 185 , 25/06/1996 P. 0056 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0464/96 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (29 February 1996)Subject: Environmental protection on the Akamas peninsular in CyprusAccording to a World Bank study funded by the European Union, the Akamas peninsula, a biotope of major importance for the entire Mediterranean, is classified as a fully protected area where restrictions are imposed on building and all forms of development. Furthermore, the Akamas peninsula is included in the environment section of the Cypriot Government's application for accession to the European Union. However, there have been disturbing reports of large-scale tourist development projects in the area, the granting of planning permission for major tourist facilities and adoption of new plans for the region's road network, which would result in the destruction of large areas of unspoilt countryside and farmland.Following the conclusion of the EU-Cyprus Association Agreement, is the Commission able to promote more effective environmental protection measures on the Akamas peninsula by means of the financial aid earmarked for Cyprus?Joint answer to Written Questions E-0400/96 and E-0464/96 given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (23 April 1996)The Commission is not in a position to discuss with the Government of Cyprus the matters mentioned by the Honourable Members. The projects cited are in fact the jurisdiction of the state of Cyprus.The conversion of Akamas into a national park has not been part of discussions in the framework of the structured dialogue with Cyprus on environment, nor has such an issue has been included in the context of Cyprus harmonization with the acquis communautaire.The fact that the Commission can not interfere with the decisions of the government of Cyprus does not mean it is not attentive to the matter. The Commission delegation in Cyprus, which verifies the correct implementation of the Community's projects in Akamas, will follow the question with particular attention.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 466/96 by Carlos ROBLES PIQUER to the Commission. Community support for developing the energy amplifier
Date: 1996-02-29
Institutions: European Parliament, ROBLES PIQUER
Subjects: CERN, nuclear fission, nuclear safety, project evaluation, technology assessment













EUR-Lex - 91996E0466 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0466

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 466/96 by Carlos ROBLES PIQUER to the Commission. Community support for developing the energy amplifier  


Official Journal C 217 , 26/07/1996 P. 0048 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0466/96 by Carlos Robles Piquer (PPE) to the Commission (29 February 1996)Subject: Community support for developing the energy amplifierA recent report by the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN/AT/95-58(ET)), signed by Dr Carlo Rubbia, made a comparative analysis of the safety and environmental advantages of the energy amplifier (EA) and fusion by magnetic confinement (FMC).The report stated that both systems entail similar radiological activation and residual radioactivity, and similar levels of intrinsic security and energy potential (reserves). However, as the EA mainly uses more tried and tested technology, there are fewer uncertainties, it is simpler to maintain and its costs are easier to assess than those of the FMC and are significantly lower than those of current energy sources.What is the Commission's view of these findings? If the prospects offered by the EA are much more favourable in the short- and medium-term than those of fusion, or at least similar, what degree of support is the Commission giving (or does it intend to give) to the development of the EA compared with that given to fusion? If the Commission does not yet have a clear opinion on the EA, what steps does it intend to take to make a proper assessment of its potential?Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (15 April 1996)The Commission has asked the Scientific and Technical Committee of Euratom (STC) to investigate an energy amplifier that operates on the principle of nuclear fission. Over the course of the year, the Commission will thoroughly examine the STC's opinion.During the year, the Commission will also order an independent assessment of the research into fusion and its prospects. This assessment will bear on all aspects of fusion (not only scientific and technical aspects, but also socio-economic and financial aspects, as well as safety and the environmental impact) and will also include a comparison with other energy sources. The conclusions of this assessment will be passed on to Parliament.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 439/96 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. SMU
Date: 1996-02-29
Institutions: AMADEO, European Parliament
Subjects: management training, vocational training













EUR-Lex - 91996E0439 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0439

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 439/96 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. SMU  


Official Journal C 217 , 26/07/1996 P. 0041 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0439/96 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (29 February 1996)Subject: SMUIn its resolution on a coherent employment strategy for the European Union (A4-0166/95) ((OJ C 249, 13.7.1995, p. 143. )), the European Parliament called on the Commission to draw up a special programme for SMU management training.A survey conducted by the Council showed that SMU have an inadequate knowledge of European financial regulations and that there are also considerable differences in the level of knowledge between Member States.Clearly, SMU need to be familiar with and have access to these rules if they are to be useful to them, bearing in mind that deadlines for requesting European Union financial rules are often too short and need to be extended and the Commission should spend more time making sure that the rules are widely known in all the Member States. Does the Commission not think that it is time to pay special attention to SMU and to publish the special training programme mentioned above, since only an active commitment on the part of SMU will make it possible to stimulate a gradual rise in employment throughout the European Union?Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission (9 April 1996)The Commission would ask the Honourable Member to refer to the answer given to written question E-3190/95 by Mr Hernandez Mollar ((OJ C 161, 5.6.1996, p. 8. )).In addition, the Commission proposal for a multiannual programme (1997-2000) in favour of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) ((Doc. COM(96)98 final. )) aims to improve the financial environment and will, once adopted, enable some limited actions to be launched in the field of management training, particularly for female heads of companies.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 452/96 by James MOORHOUSE to the Commission. EU citizens' eligibility to vote in France
Date: 1996-02-29
Institutions: European Parliament, MOORHOUSE
Subjects: Council of the European Union, EC Directive, EU national, France, local election, right to stand for election, right to vote













EUR-Lex - 91996E0452 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0452

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 452/96 by James MOORHOUSE to the Commission. EU citizens' eligibility to vote in France  


Official Journal C 217 , 26/07/1996 P. 0045 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0452/96 by James Moorhouse (PPE) to the Commission (29 February 1996)Subject: EU citizens' eligibility to vote in FranceWhy has the Commission apparently turned a blind eye to the failure of the French Government to implement Article 8b of the Maastricht Treaty as regards local government elections?This Article stipulates that a European Union citizen residing in a Member State of which he is not a national, shall have the right to vote and to stand as a candidate in the Member State in which he resides under the same conditions as nationals of that state.Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (2 April 1996)In accordance with the procedure provided in Article 169 of the EC Treaty the Commission has already drawn the attention of the French government to the need to implement in national law Directive 94/80/EC ((JO N° L 368, 31.12.1994 )) of 19 December 1994 laying down detailed arrangements for the exercise of the right to vote and to stand as a candidate in municipal elections by citizens of the Union residing in a Member State of which they are not nationals.