do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 933/96 by Shaun SPIERS to the Commission. Labelling of animal feed products
Date: 1996-04-23
Institutions: European Parliament, SPIERS
Subjects: animal disease, animal feedingstuffs, animal nutrition, labelling, manufactured feedingstuffs, veterinary legislation













EUR-Lex - 91996E0933 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0933

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 933/96 by Shaun SPIERS to the Commission. Labelling of animal feed products  


Official Journal C 322 , 28/10/1996 P. 0015 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0933/96 by Shaun Spiers (PSE) to the Commission (23 April 1996)Subject: Labelling of animal feed productsIn view of public concern about the contents of feedstuffs for farm animals and the possible link between certain foodstuffs and bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), does the Commission propose to tighten the regulations concerning animal feed products and, in particular, does it plan to improve the labelling of such products?Joint answer to Written Questions E-0933/96 and P-1232/96 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (3 June 1996)In the light of the spread of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), many animal feed manufacturers, livestock producers and consumers have become genuinely concerned over the use of certain by-products of animal origin in animal feed.Council Directive 79/373/EEC of 2 April 1979 ((OJ L 86, 6.4.1979. )) sets out in great detail rules to be observed for the labelling of compound feedingstuffs intended for animals as a whole.As regards the declaration of the ingredients of compound feedingstuffs for animals other than pets, i.e. production animals such a bovine livestock, the Directive lays down that all the ingredients shall be listed in descending order of their proportion in the feedingstuff.For the purposes of the declaration, the ingredients may also be listed according to the categories laid down by Commission Directive 91/357/EEC. ((OJ L 193, 17.7.1991. ))In the light of the spread of bovine spongiform encephalopathy, the Commission will examine whether it is necessary to tighten the current rules on labelling in order to provide livestock producers with yet more precise information on the rules governing the use of certain products of animal origin.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 921/96 by José TORRES COUTO to the Commission. European Social Fund Delays in payments/ Compensation
Date: 1996-04-23
Institutions: European Parliament, TORRES COUTO
Subjects: European Social Fund, Portugal, advance payment, business data processing, payment













EUR-Lex - 91996E0921 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0921

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 921/96 by José TORRES COUTO to the Commission. European Social Fund Delays in payments/ Compensation  


Official Journal C 297 , 08/10/1996 P. 0050 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0921/96 by José Torres Couto (PSE) to the Commission (23 April 1996)Subject: European Social Fund Delays in payments/CompensationAt a public hearing on the ESF organized by the Committee on Social Affairs, a Member of the Commission, Mrs Papandreou, speaking some months before the end of her term of office, revealed that lengthy delays in the transfer of funds from Brussels to the Member States had occurred in 1988 and 1989 on account of a tiresome and protracted fault in the computer system (see transcript of the hearing)!How long was the system out of action? Can the Commission indicate as accurately as possible how long ESF grants to Portugal were held up?What compensatory measures has the Commission laid down to protect the legitimate rights of project organizers against all the resulting harm?Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (7 June 1996)The Commission informs the Honourable Member that, in respect of European Social Fund (ESF) grants to Portugal for 1988 and 1989, the decisions were taken and advance payments made on the following dates:>TABLE>This shows that there were no delays in ESF payments to Portugal for the years concerned.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 919/96 by Ulpu IIVARI to the Commission. Simplification of export subsidies for food products
Date: 1996-04-23
Institutions: European Parliament, IIVARI
Subjects: European Commission, Finland, administrative formalities, export, export subsidy, foodstuff, frontier region, simplification of formalities













EUR-Lex - 91996E0919 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0919

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 919/96 by Ulpu IIVARI to the Commission. Simplification of export subsidies for food products  


Official Journal C 217 , 26/07/1996 P. 0128 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0919/96 by Ulpu Iivari (PSE) to the Commission (23 April 1996)Subject: Simplification of export subsidies for food productsFood products are exported from Finland to Russia with EU export subsidies. The consignments concerned can be very small, particularly in the case of those despatched to neighbouring regions, for example those supplied by meat processors direct to individual shops. Each consignment must be notified separately, which involves considerable paperwork. For example one Finnish food supplier had to complete a form concerning a consignment on which 1.43 Finnish marks was paid in export subsidy. The cost of processing the form is many times greater than this.In view of the above, what will the Commission do to simplify the inconvenient and costly bureaucracy involved in exporting foodstuffs to neighbouring areas of third countries so as to avoid the necessity of submitting a separate notification for each consignment?Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (30 May 1996)The Commission has asked the Member State concerned for information regarding the facts raised to by the Honourable Member. It will inform him of its findings.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 911/96 by Christof TANNERT to the Commission. Community programmes for Berlin in 1995 and 1996
Date: 1996-04-23
Institutions: European Parliament, TANNERT
Subjects: EU aid, European Commission













EUR-Lex - 91996E0911 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0911

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 911/96 by Christof TANNERT to the Commission. Community programmes for Berlin in 1995 and 1996  


Official Journal C 217 , 26/07/1996 P. 0127 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0911/96 by Christof Tannert (PSE) to the Commission (23 April 1996)Subject: Community programmes for Berlin in 1995 and 19961. What sums were granted in Community aid to the German 'Land' of Berlin in 1995 and 1996?2. What sums have been taken up so far?3. To which measures and programmes do(a) the sums allocated(b) the sums taken upapply?Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (5 June 1996)The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 914/96 by Mair MORGAN to the Commission. Media II: Implications of reduced membership on assessment juries
Date: 1996-04-23
Institutions: European Parliament, MORGAN
Subjects: audiovisual industry, audiovisual production, audiovisual programme, equal treatment, project evaluation, self-employed person













EUR-Lex - 91996E0914 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0914

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 914/96 by Mair MORGAN to the Commission. Media II: Implications of reduced membership on assessment juries  


Official Journal C 297 , 08/10/1996 P. 0049 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0914/96 by Mair Morgan (PSE) to the Commission (23 April 1996)Subject: Media II: Implications of reduced membership on assessment juriesThe Commission has now asked Member States to submit lists of candidates for possible inclusion on the expert juries who will assess projects seeking funding under the new Media II programme. There are indications that these juries will frequently change during the course of the Media II programme and will consist of up to 8 members. This would mean that not all Member States would have a representative on such juries and that might have adverse implications for minority language productions.What assurances can be given that projects from regions or states with a lesser-used language will not be put at a disadvantage? And how can producers in general be assured that these arrangements will not only work to the benefit of the larger projects from the stronger Member States?Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (14 June 1996)In accordance with the Council Decisions on Media II (95/563/EC and 95/564/EC ((OJ L 321, 30.12.1995. ))), the Commission may call on professional experts to help it select those who will receive assistance under the programme.Thus the Commission has already had two meetings with committees of experts who were asked to analyse the applications received following the publication of the first call for proposals relating to promotional activities of European producers on the programmes market.The experts who were consulted and selected by the Commission from lists put forward by the Member States perform this advisory task in a personal capacity in view of their experience in the sectors covered by the programme. Thus the composition of these committees varies depending on the type of dossier treated.These committees have a purely advisory status. The final choice of beneficiary is the Commission's responsibility. In some cases, the Commission must obtain the opinion of the Media Committee (when the amount of support exceeds the thresholds set out in the decisions).The Commission ensures that there is a good geographical balance in addition to the experts' competence. At the meetings organized so far, half the experts came from Member States or regions with a low audiovisual production capacity or a restricted geographic or language area.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 902/96 by Roberta ANGELILLI to the Commission. Delays in implementing the Structural Funds in Italy for the period 1994-1999
Date: 1996-04-23
Institutions: ANGELILLI, European Parliament
Subjects: Italy, Mezzogiorno, Structural Funds, project evaluation, project management













EUR-Lex - 91996E0902 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0902

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 902/96 by Roberta ANGELILLI to the Commission. Delays in implementing the Structural Funds in Italy for the period 1994-1999  


Official Journal C 345 , 15/11/1996 P. 0013 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0902/96 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission (23 April 1996)Subject: Delays in implementing the Structural Funds in Italy for the period 1994-1999During a visit to Brussels by Italian Budget Minister Mr Mario Arcelli, Commissioner Mrs Wulf-Mathies said that the use made by Italy of its Structural Fund appropriations for 1994 and 1995 is abnormally low.It also seems that only 2.5% of the appropriations for the Mezzogiorno for the period 1994-1999 have been utilized whereas 30% should have been used by this stage.Can the Commission provide a table showing all the expenditure committed under the various Structural Fund objectives in Italy?What, if any, action does the Commission intend to take vis-à-vis Italy?Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (25 June 1996)According to the most recent information supplied by the Italian authorities regarding the current programming period, the global levels of structural funds co-financed expenditure by implementing agencies for the period 1 January 1994 to 31 December 1995 is as follows:>TABLE>(1) These figures do not include Community intiatives. (2) The % figure relates to the total expenditure programmed for the period 1994-1999 (1994-1996 for Objective 2). (3) Up to 28.2.1996.For some time now the Commission has expressed concern about the poor implementation of structural fund programmes in Italy. For this reason already in 1995 it concluded an agreement with the Italian central and regional authorities on a package of measures to improve the management of structural fund programmes. The Commission considers this package crucial to the improved use of structural funds in Italy and is keeping the implementation of the agreement under close review.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 904/96 by Pieter DANKERT , Carlos PIMENTA to the Commission. New Tagus bridge financed from the Cohesion Fund
Date: 1996-04-23
Institutions: DANKERT, European Parliament, PIMENTA
Subjects: Portugal, dredging, engineering structure, environmental impact, environmental protection, waste disposal, watercourse













EUR-Lex - 91996E0904 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0904

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 904/96 by Pieter DANKERT , Carlos PIMENTA to the Commission. New Tagus bridge financed from the Cohesion Fund  


Official Journal C 297 , 08/10/1996 P. 0046 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0904/96 by Pieter Dankert (PSE) and Carlos Pimenta (ELDR) to the Commission (23 April 1996)Subject: New Tagus bridge financed from the Cohesion FundPursuant to Article 5 of Annex IV of the decision on project 94/10/65/005 the Advisory Committee must check whether in the construction of the new Tagus bridge, partly financed from the Cohesion Fund, the Community rules in particular on the environment have been observed.Has this committee taken action against the illegal dredging activities, against the dumping of sediments outside the designated sites, against activities on the salt marshes in the breeding season of the birds which nest there and against the lack of fences protecting birds and humans?Has the Commission representative on this committee alerted the Commission to the infringements of the various rules with a request for action?If so, why has the Commission not started an inquiry, as referred to in Article 10 of the decision on project 94/10/65/005?If not, why has this committee and the Commission representative no knowledge of matters which are widely reported in the Portuguese media?Joint answer to Written Questions E-0904/96, E-0905/96, E-0906/96, E-0907/96 and E-0908/96 given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (9 July 1996)The Commission is conducting a detailed investigation of the problem raised by the Honourable Members and will inform them of the outcome as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 901/96 by Anita POLLACK to the Commission. Pollution from destruction of fruit and vegetables
Date: 1996-04-23
Institutions: European Parliament, POLLACK
Subjects: agricultural surplus, common agricultural policy, degradation of the environment, fruit, groundwater, surface water, vegetable, water pollution, withdrawal from the market













EUR-Lex - 91996E0901 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0901

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 901/96 by Anita POLLACK to the Commission. Pollution from destruction of fruit and vegetables  


Official Journal C 297 , 08/10/1996 P. 0045 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0901/96 by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission (23 April 1996)Subject: Pollution from destruction of fruit and vegetablesIn answer to my questions E-3458/95 and 3459/95 ((OJ C 112, 17.4.1996, p. 34. )), the Commission has chosen to hide behind the veil of subsidiarity. However, if the Court of Auditors was able to pinpoint regions of the EU in which pollution to surface and underground waters has occurred as the result of years of destruction of surplus fruit and vegetables withdrawn from the market under the CAP, the Commission must also know where these areas are and I repeat my demand for a list of these regions.Answer given by Mr Fischer on behalf of the Commission (20 May 1996)The Commission informs the Honourable Member that it has never planned enquiries in order to list regions in which water has been polluted as a result of destruction of fruit and vegetables and that a list of such regions, even if based on the Court of Auditors' discoveries, could not appropriately be provided by the Commission.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 911/96 by Christof TANNERT to the Commission. Community programmes for Berlin in 1995 and 1996 (SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER)
Date: 1996-04-23
Institutions: European Parliament, TANNERT
Subjects: EU aid, European Commission, exchange of information













EUR-Lex - 91996E0911(01) - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0911(01)

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 911/96 by Christof TANNERT to the Commission. Community programmes for Berlin in 1995 and 1996 (SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER)  


Official Journal C 305 , 15/10/1996 P. 0027 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0911/96 by Christof Tannert (PSE) to the Commission (23 April 1996)Subject: Community programmes for Berlin in 1995 and 19961. What sums were granted in Community aid to the German 'Land' of Berlin in 1995 and 1996?2. What sums have been taken up so far?3. To which measures and programmes doa) the sums allocatedb) the sums taken upapply?Supplementary answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (24 July 1996)In view of the length of its answer, the Commission is sending it direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 935/96 by Shaun SPIERS to the Commission. Proposal for a White Paper on Associations
Date: 1996-04-23
Institutions: European Parliament, SPIERS
Subjects: Austria, EU publication, Finland, Sweden, association, foundation













EUR-Lex - 91996E0935 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0935

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 935/96 by Shaun SPIERS to the Commission. Proposal for a White Paper on Associations  


Official Journal C 280 , 25/09/1996 P. 0105 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0935/96 by Shaun Spiers (PSE) to the Commission (23 April 1996)Subject: Proposal for a White Paper on AssociationsWhen does the Commission propose to publish its White Paper on associations which is eagerly awaited by associations across the European Union and would the Commission explain its reasons for the apparent delay?Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission (28 May 1996)The proposed white paper on associations and foundations is likely to be agreed by the Commission in the very near future. It has been necessary for the Commission to consult with the association and foundation movements in order to ensure that the white paper takes on many of the issues that concern the movements in their European work. It has also been important to include further information on this sector in Finland, Sweden and Austria in order to ensure that the white paper is relevant to organisations in these Member States.The white paper will be discussed at a forthcoming meeting of the Commission, and will be published in the near future, thus making a substantial contribution to the construction of a Europe which is closer to citizens.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 932/96 by Shaun SPIERS to the Commission. Animal feed products
Date: 1996-04-23
Institutions: European Parliament, SPIERS
Subjects: animal disease, animal nutrition, animal product, food additive, health control, intra-EU trade, labelling













EUR-Lex - 91996E0932 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0932

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 932/96 by Shaun SPIERS to the Commission. Animal feed products  


Official Journal C 345 , 15/11/1996 P. 0018 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0932/96 by Shaun Spiers (PSE) to the Commission (23 April 1996)Subject: Animal feed productsWhat are the EU regulations regarding the feeding of animal and poultry by-products to:1. ruminant farm animals2. other farm animals3. poultry4. farmed fish?Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the commission (3 June 1996)Intracommunity trade in animal feedingstuffs is subject to strict rules concerning labelling, use of additives and raw materials, the presence of contaminants and the approval and inspection of establishments producing feedingstuffs. These rules are applicable to all feedingstuffs produced for species destined for human consumption.With regard to animal and public health, the requirements for the production of feedingstuffs of animal origin are set out in various Community provisions:- Council Directive 90/667/EEC ((OJ L 363, 27.12.1990. Directive as last amended by the Act of Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden.)) laying down veterinary rules concerning the processing of animal waste for its placing on the market and for the prevention of pathogens in feedstuffs of animal or fish origin. This Directive establishes detailed hygiene requirements for the collection and transport of animal waste, hygiene requirements for animal-waste processing plants and microbiological requirements concerning the products after processing;- Commission Decision 92/562/EEC ((OJ L 359, 9.12.1992. Directive as last amended by the Act of Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden.)) on the approval of alternative heat treatment systems for processing high-risk material;- Commission Decision 94/382/EEC ((OJ L 172, 7.7.1994.)) (as last amended by Commission Decision 95/29/EC ((OJ L 38, 18.2.1995.))), on the approval of alternative heat treatment systems for processing animal waste of ruminant origin, with a view to the inactivation of spongiform encephalopathy agents. In particular this Decision prohibits the use of one rendering system (the continuous vacuum added fat system) and sets new time and temperature parameters for all the other systems approved according to the Decision 92/562/EEC for the processing of ruminant material;- Commission Decision 94/381/EC ((OJ L 172, 7.7.1994.)) concerning certain protection measures with regard to bovine spongiform encephalopathy and the feeding of mammalian derived protein. This Decision prohibits the feeding of protein derived from mammalian tissues to ruminant species;- Commission Decision 91/516/EEC ((OJ L 281, 9.10.1991.)) establishing a list of ingredients the use of which is prohibited in compound feedingstuffs. This list includes materials like faeces and urine, leather and leather waste.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 916/96 by Ian WHITE to the Commission. Safety at sea
Date: 1996-04-23
Institutions: European Parliament, WHITE
Subjects: EU policy, International Maritime Organisation, competitiveness, engine, international transport, maritime transport, shipping policy, vehicle parts, vessel













EUR-Lex - 91996E0916 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0916

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 916/96 by Ian WHITE to the Commission. Safety at sea  


Official Journal C 305 , 15/10/1996 P. 0027 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0916/96 by Ian White (PSE) to the Commission (23 April 1996)Subject: Safety at seaDoes the Commission have in mind any legislative proposal which would require EU-registered vessels to have at least two propellers to avoid the disastrous effects of single-engined failure?Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission (10 May 1996)The Commission has supported efforts at international level to minimize the risk of failure of shipborne propulsion and manoeuvring systems. Since its establishment in 1959, the International maritime organization (IMO) has striven to improve the reliability of such systems and has established several regulations in the Safety Of Life At Sea (SOLAS) convention, applicable to passenger ships and cargo ships engaged on international voyages.The 1974 SOLAS convention, as amended, requires national maritime administrations - which are responsible for the implementation of the Convention - to give special consideration to the reliability of single essential propulsion power to ensure that it is sufficient to give the ship a navigable speed, especially in the case of unconventional arrangements ((SOLAS Convention, Chapter II-1, Part C: Machinery installations, Regulation 26, ¶ 2. )).In its communication 'A common policy on safe seas' of 24 February 1993 ((COM(93)66 final. )), the Commission, taking into account the global character of shipping and its impact on safety and competitiveness, established a policy based upon the principle of ensuring proper and effective implementation of international rules. In its communication 'Towards a new maritime strategy' ((COM(96)81. )) the Commission has however emphasized the role the Community can play in order to ensure safety and fair competition in international maritime trade.Taking the above into account, the Commission has no plans to bring forward any legislative proposals which would require Community registered vessels to have at least two propellers.