do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
96/254/EC: Commission Decision of 26 March 1996 amending Decision 94/448/EC laying down special conditions governing imports of fishery and aquaculture products originating in New Zealand (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 1996-03-26
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: New Zealand, fishery produce, fishery product, health certificate, import, veterinary inspection













EUR-Lex - 31996D0254 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



31996D0254

96/254/EC: Commission Decision of 26 March 1996 amending Decision 94/448/EC laying down special conditions governing imports of fishery and aquaculture products originating in New Zealand (Text with EEA relevance)  


Official Journal L 086 , 04/04/1996 P. 0075 - 0080 





COMMISSION DECISION of 26 March 1996 amending Decision 94/448/EC laying down special conditions governing imports of fishery and aquaculture products originating in New Zealand (Text with EEA relevance) (96/254/EC)THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,Having regard to Council Directive 91/493/EEC of 22 July 1991 laying down the health conditions for the production and the placing on the market of fishery products (1), as last amended by the Act of Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden, and in particular Article 11 (5) thereof,Whereas the list of establishments and factory ships approved by New Zealand importing fishery and aquaculture products into the Community has been drawn up in Commission Decision 94/448/EC (2), as last amended by Decision 96/31/EC (3); whereas this list may be amended following the communication of a new list by the competent authority in New Zealand;Whereas the competent authority in New Zealand has communicated a new list of 164 establishments and 205 factory vessels;Whereas it is necessary to amend the list of approved establishments and factory vessels;Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision have been drawn up in accordance with the procedure laid down by Commission Decision 90/13/EEC (4),HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:Article 1 Annex B of Decision 94/448/EC is replaced by the Annex to this Decision.Article 2 This Decision is addressed to the Member States.Done at Brussels, 26 March 1996.For the CommissionFranz FISCHLERMember of the Commission(1) OJ No L 268, 24. 9. 1991, p. 15.(2) OJ No L 184, 20. 7. 1994, p. 16.(3) OJ No L 9, 12. 1. 1996, p. 6.(4) OJ No L 8, 11. 1. 1990, p. 70.ANNEX 'ANNEX BLIST OF APPROVED ESTABLISHMENTS AND FACTORY VESSELSI. Establishments>TABLE>II. Factory Vessels>TABLE>
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 705/96 by Eolo PARODI to the Commission. Imports of beer from third countries
Date: 1996-03-26
Institutions: European Parliament, PARODI
Subjects: Italy, application of EU law, beer, certificate of origin, competence of the Member States, customs regulations, import, third country, transit













EUR-Lex - 91996E0705 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0705

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 705/96 by Eolo PARODI to the Commission. Imports of beer from third countries  


Official Journal C 185 , 25/06/1996 P. 0082 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0705/96 by Eolo Parodi (UPE) to the Commission (26 March 1996)Subject: Imports of beer from third countriesBeer may not be imported into Italy from third countries unless an officially approved Italian body has issued a certificate confirming that the goods have been produced in the country of origin. Such a certificate is not required by the other Member States.As a result, some types of beer have first to pass in transit through another Member State in order to be freely imported into Italy without a certificate.1. Does the Commission not believe that the technical restrictions imposed in Italy are contrary to Directive 92/83/EEC? ((OJ L 316, 31.10.1992, p. 21. ))2. Does it not also believe that such practices place Italian beer importers at a severe disadvantage?Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (16 April 1996)The Honourable Member is probably referring to the certificate of conformity required by Italy for imports of beer from other countries, on the basis of Article 19 of Law No 1354 of 16 August 1962, as amended by Article 7 of Law No 329 of 14 July 1974.The Commission considers that the imposition of the obligation to produce a certificate of this kind, with the aim of ensuring that imported beer has the characteristics laid down by Italy's legislation, is not contrary to Directive 92/83/EEC, which simply harmonizes the structure of some of the Member States' excise duties.The Commission would draw the Honourable Member's attention to Article 58(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code ((OJ L 302 of 19.10.1992. )). This provides for the option of applying certain restrictions, which come under the heading of national or Community legislation. In this particular case the restrictions are national ones. The Commission is nevertheless of the opinion that the Italian authorities should re-examine the advisability of maintaining them, in the light of the principles governing the operation of the internal market.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 741/96 by Robin TEVERSON to the Commission. EU incentives for good animal welfare farming practices
Date: 1996-03-26
Institutions: European Parliament, TEVERSON
Subjects: Structural Funds, aid system, application of EU law, common agricultural policy, livestock farming, slaughter of animals, transport of animals













EUR-Lex - 91996E0741 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0741

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 741/96 by Robin TEVERSON to the Commission. EU incentives for good animal welfare farming practices  


Official Journal C 280 , 25/09/1996 P. 0072 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0741/96 by Robin Teverson (ELDR) to the Commission (26 March 1996)Subject: EU incentives for good animal welfare farming practicesThe failure of the EU to agree on many basic animal welfare issues can only be described as disappointing. In the agricultural area, there are nevertheless many farmers who would be willing to introduce better animal rearing practices but do not have the necessary funds to do so.Is the Commission willing to look into the possibility of using structural funding in agriculture to compensate and encourage farmers to reach the highest animal welfare standards?Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (22 April 1996)The Community has, since 1974, adopted legislation on the protection of animals on farms, during transport and at the time of slaughter. A declaration annexed to the EC Treaty, specifically calls upon the Parliament, the Council and the Commission, as well as the Member States, when drafting and implementing Community legislation on the common agricultural policy, transport, the internal market and research, to pay full regard to the welfare requirements of animals. In its proposals to the Council in the field of animal protection the Commission has always sought the highest practicable standards.Concerning programmes under the structural funds, the Commission has already agreed, with the Member States involved, a number of specific measures to promote animal welfare. For example in some objective 1 programmes the Commission has approved co-financed measures to secure improvements in the welfare in particular of laying hens, pigs, and bovines. In addition, specific provision exists under the objective 5(a) (agricultural structures) measures to allow both Community and state aid investment in animal welfare projects even in those sectors where investment is normally excluded.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 700/96 by José VALVERDE LÓPEZ to the Commission. Aid for building desalination plants in Andalusia
Date: 1996-03-26
Institutions: European Parliament, VALVERDE LOPEZ
Subjects: Andalusia, drought, water resources, water treatment













EUR-Lex - 91996E0700 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0700

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 700/96 by José VALVERDE LÓPEZ to the Commission. Aid for building desalination plants in Andalusia  


Official Journal C 322 , 28/10/1996 P. 0005 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0700/96 by José Valverde López (PPE) to the Commission (26 March 1996)Subject: Aid for building desalination plants in AndalusiaFollowing the severe drought over the last few years in Andalusia, thanks to which 60% of the population has suffered from severe restrictions on domestic water use, the Spanish authorities have decided to build new desalination plants in Seville, Cadiz, the Costa del Sol and Almería.It has been suggested that these investments could benefit from Structural Fund and Cohesion Fund aid.Can the Commission state whether these projects have been approved or are in course of being approved?Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (19 April 1996)The Commission is aware of the severe problems that have been caused by the drought, especially in Andalusia. One of the priorities of the Cohesion Fund is indeed to improve the management of water resources, and in certain cases desalination projects might be of some help.With a view to obtaining Cohesion Fund cofinancing, the Spanish authorities had planned to submit a number of desalination projects towards the end of March this year. However, no major project of this nature has as yet been proposed.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 701/96 by José VALVERDE LÓPEZ to the Commission. ERDF, ESF and EAGGF (Guidance) payments 1989- 1993
Date: 1996-03-26
Institutions: European Parliament, VALVERDE LOPEZ
Subjects: EU financing, Italy, Spain, Structural Funds, use of aid













EUR-Lex - 91996E0701 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0701

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 701/96 by José VALVERDE LÓPEZ to the Commission. ERDF, ESF and EAGGF (Guidance) payments 1989- 1993  


Official Journal C 280 , 25/09/1996 P. 0066 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0701/96 by José Valverde López (PPE) to the Commission (26 March 1996)Subject: ERDF, ESF and EAGGF (Guidance) payments 1989-93Analysis of ERDF, ESF and EAGGF (Guidance) payments in Spain and Italy over the period 1989-93 reveals considerable variations.Italy received ECU 1336,26 million in payments in 1991 and ECU 3406,6 million in 1993: in other words, payments effectively doubled. Spain, by contrast, received substantially less in 1993 than in 1992; the 1993 figure, only ECU 2971,3 million, was less than that for Italy.Can the Commission explain the main reasons for these considerable variations?Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (23 april 1996)The financial management of structural funds expenditure reflects the state of progress of the operations on the ground; in other words, the rate of disbursements is determined by the implementation of the programmes.Hence, Member States whose Community Support Frameworks for the period 1989-93 show a satisfactory rate of progress received more at the beginning of the period than at the end. By contrast, Member States in which operations fell substantially behind schedule received less funding at the beginning and more at the end of the period. Overall, each Member State will receive for the entire period 1989-93 the payments to which it is entitled.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 736/96 by Bernie MALONE to the Commission. Customs declarations on postage parcels
Date: 1996-03-26
Institutions: European Parliament, MALONE
Subjects: Ireland, United Kingdom, air transport, customs formalities, postal service, transport safety













EUR-Lex - 91996E0736 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0736

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 736/96 by Bernie MALONE to the Commission. Customs declarations on postage parcels  


Official Journal C 280 , 25/09/1996 P. 0070 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0736/96 by Bernie Malone (PSE) to the Commission (26 March 1996)Subject: Customs declarations on postage parcelsWhy can the British postal authorities continue to require that all parcels posted between the United Kingdom and Ireland bear completed customs declarations?Is this practice consistent with European law?Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (2 May 1996)Customs declarations are not required on parcels between the United Kingdom and Ireland, or elsewhere in the Community.The Honourable Member may be referring to a form called 'despatch pack PFU5' which is required by Parcelforce international, a branch of the British post office group, firstly to allow it to inform postal partners in advance about certain characteristics of parcels in order to facilitate their shipment and delivery and secondly because aviation security regulations require a content description.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 718/96 by Yiannis ROUBATIS to the Commission. Involvement of Turkey in the distribution and production of drugs
Date: 1996-03-26
Institutions: European Parliament, ROUBATIS
Subjects: EU financing, Türkiye, drug addiction, drug traffic, narcotic, production













EUR-Lex - 91996E0718 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0718

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 718/96 by Yiannis ROUBATIS to the Commission. Involvement of Turkey in the distribution and production of drugs  


Official Journal C 217 , 26/07/1996 P. 0100 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0718/96 by Yiannis Roubatis (PSE) to the Commission (26 March 1996)Subject: Involvement of Turkey in the distribution and production of drugsAccording to the State Department's annual report on international drugs control published on 1 March 1995, Turkey is a focal point for the distribution of drugs from south-west Asia to Europe and also produces or processes large quantities of drugs intended mainly for European markets.1. What information does the Commission have concerning the references to Turkey in the State Department's report?2. What steps has it taken and what steps does it intend to take in future to ensure that this country, which is associated with the European Union, introduces stricter controls on drugs distribution and immediately ends the production of all types of drugs, apart from those used for medical purposes?Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (13 May 1996)The Commission is concerned about the drug problem in Turkey and accordingly is aware of the annual report on international drug control published in March 1995 by the US State Department which reviews the situation in over a hundred countries (including several Member States) in relation to this matter.Under budget heading B7-5080 - Campaign against drug abuse, in 1995 the Commission made an ECU 760 000 grant to the United Nations International Drug Control Programme (UNDCP) as a contribution to that body's programme of action, set up jointly with the Turkish authorities, to campaign against drugs in Turkey. Under the contract between the Commission and the UNDCP, which took effect in January 1996, the latter undertakes to take action chiefly covering four fields, including the campaign against drug trafficking, preventive action, care for addicts and control of supply. The programme will be implemented over a three-year period.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 681/96 by Thomas MEGAHY to the Commission. Penal reform in Cuba and elsewhere
Date: 1996-03-26
Institutions: European Parliament, MEGAHY
Subjects: Cuba, cooperation agreement, democratisation, economic cooperation, human rights, international relations, judicial reform, political prisoner, third country













EUR-Lex - 91996E0681 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0681

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 681/96 by Thomas MEGAHY to the Commission. Penal reform in Cuba and elsewhere  


Official Journal C 185 , 25/06/1996 P. 0079 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0681/96 by Thomas Megahy (PSE) to the Commission (26 March 1996)Subject: Penal reform in Cuba and elsewhereAccording to reports in the British press, Commissioner Manuel Marin recently held a ten-hour meeting with President Fidel Castro of Cuba. The purpose of the meeting was to promote economic cooperation. Commissioner Marin is said to have raised the subject of 'reforms to the island's penal system'. Is it now Commission policy to raise penal reform in connection with trade and if so has it done so with each of the ACP countries, almost all of which have more political prisoners kept under worse conditions than those in Cuba, with the Turkish Government, with which the Union has recently concluded a Customs Union agreement, and which presides over a well-documented regime of systematic torture, or with the Government of the People's Republic of China, a country in which forced labour is routine? Will the Commission also consider raising other human rights issues with prospective trading partners? (Examples might be infant mortality, access to health care, availability of education and consequent rates of literacy).Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission (18 April 1996)On his recent visit to Cuba Mr Marín did indeed raise with the Cuban authorities the subject of possible modernization of the penal system, pointing out that such an initiative would undoubtedly be helpful in fostering closer EU-Cuba relations and dialogue.The Madrid European Council (15-16 December 1995) called on the Commission to prepare and lay before the Council a draft negotiating mandate for an EC-Cuba cooperation agreement, noting that the Council would consider the draft in the light of domestic developments in Cuba.In the light of the guidelines laid down by the European Council, Mr Marín considered it timely to raise with the Cuban authorities the issue of their penal code.All cooperation agreements must explicitly invoke a basis in respect for human rights and democratic principles, and penal law, particularly the procedural aspects, has an obvious bearing on these fundamental issues.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 687/96 by Jesús CABEZÓN ALONSO to the Commission. Conservation of fish stocks
Date: 1996-03-26
Institutions: CABEZON ALONSO, European Parliament
Subjects: Community fisheries, common fisheries policy, conservation of fish stocks, fishery management, fishery resources, fishing area, fishing fleet, fishing regulations













EUR-Lex - 91996E0687 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0687

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 687/96 by Jesús CABEZÓN ALONSO to the Commission. Conservation of fish stocks  


Official Journal C 185 , 25/06/1996 P. 0080 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0687/96 by Jesús Cabezón Alonso (PSE) to the Commission (26 March 1996)Subject: Conservation of fish stocks1996 will see the expiry of the multiannual guidance programmes for the Community fishing fleets.What broad criteria will the Commission use when submitting a revised version of these programmes?Answer given by Ms Bonino on behalf of the Commission (3 April 1996)The fourth generation multiannual guidance programmes (MGP IV) will replace the MGP III from 1 January next year. The programmes, which run from 1997 to 1999, are designed to reduce overcapacity in the Community fleet, bringing it into line with available fish stocks.The Commission will therefore be setting fleet reduction targets for each group of fishing vessels on the basis of recommendations by scientific bodies. In doing so, it will take account of the socio-economic impact of such moves on fishing areas. For the purposes of the programmes, the fleet will be divided up according to type of fishing vessel, zone and gear while fishing capacities will be worked out on the basis of the tonnage, power and number of vessels.The Council is due to discuss the links that are needed between the capacity reduction measures under the MGP and the conservation measures under fishery management schemes.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 726/96 by Concepció FERRER to the Commission. Network of European consultants
Date: 1996-03-26
Institutions: European Parliament, FERRER
Subjects: cooperation policy, cross-border cooperation, employment policy, information network, public administration, regional cooperation, trade union, vocational training













EUR-Lex - 91996E0726 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0726

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 726/96 by Concepció FERRER to the Commission. Network of European consultants  


Official Journal C 280 , 25/09/1996 P. 0068 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0726/96 by Concepció Ferrer (PPE) to the Commission (26 March 1996)Subject: Network of European consultantsThe network of European consultants set up by the Commission is designed to provide a link between job vacancies and demand, thus making it possible for the right to freedom of movement to be exercised.There are eight cross-border coordinators, and various projects are being launched.Can the Commission say which cross-border associations have appointed a European consultant and can it provide information on their composition?Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (19 April 1996)Crossborder EURES is a network of collaborative structures designed to meet the need for information and consultation on mobility specific to border regions. It brings together the public employment and vocational training services, trade unions, employers' organisations, local and regional authorities and institutions concerned with employment and vocational training in the border regions, as well as the Commission.On 20 March 1996, 12 Eures structures were being subsidised by the Commission and were operating in the following Member States and border regions:1) Hainault / Nord-Pas-de-Calais / West Flanders / Kent (HNFK)(Belgium, France, UK)2) Scheldt / Kempen (IGA I)(Belgium, Netherlands)3) Euregio Gronau (Enschede)(Germany, Netherlands)4) Euregio Meuse / Rhine (IGA II)(Belgium, Germany, Netherlands)5) European Development Pole (EDP)(Belgium, France, Luxembourg)6) Lorraine / Saarland(Germany, France)7) Provence / Alpes-Côte d'Azur / Liguria (Eurazur)(France, Italy)8) Rhône-Alpes / Piedmont / Valle d'Aosta (Transalp)(France, Italy)9) Schleswig - South Jutland(Denmark, Germany)10) Carinthia / Friuli - Venezia Giulia (Euralp)(Italy, Austria)11) Rhine-Waal / Rhein-Meuse (North)(Germany, Netherlands)12) Bavaria / Voralberg - Tyrol - Salzburg-Upper Austria(Germany, Austria)The Euroadvisers are the principal actors in the Crossborder Eures network. In each cross-border structure, the Euroadvisers work within their own organisations, which may be public employment services, organisations representing employees or employers, and regional organisations.