do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1061/96 by Carlos ROBLES PIQUER to the Commission. Imports of non-Community oranges into the United Kingdom
Date: 1996-05-13
Institutions: European Parliament, ROBLES PIQUER
Subjects: Community preference, EU production, United Kingdom, agri-foodstuffs, citrus fruit, fruit juice, import, import price













EUR-Lex - 91996E1061 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1061

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1061/96 by Carlos ROBLES PIQUER to the Commission. Imports of non-Community oranges into the United Kingdom  


Official Journal C 345 , 15/11/1996 P. 0025 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1061/96 by Carlos Robles Piquer (PPE) to the Commission (13 May 1996)Subject: Imports of non-Community oranges into the United KingdomIn January 1996 the Commission authorized, exceptionally, the importation of 12 000 tonnes of non-Community oranges for the production of fresh juice. The measure was to be valid only until the end of March and was based on an apparent shortage of Community oranges.Can the Commission say how this authorization was applied and whether it does not consider that it may have prejudiced orange producers in the Member States, whom the principle of Community preference is supposed to benefit?Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (4 June 1996)On 11 January the Commission adopted a temporary derogating measure allowing 12 000 tonnes of oranges intended for processing to be imported at a reduced entry price.This measure, which was essential to ensure the immediate supply of freshly squeezed orange juice to the Community industry, was based on the specifications for oranges used to produce juice of this type and in particular on their limonin content (a bitter substance) and degree Brix (sugar content).The Commission has undertaken an enquiry to ascertain whether oranges produced in the Community during the period 1 December to 31 March possessed the appropriate technical qualities to make them suitable for the manufacture of freshly squeezed juice.As the industry concerned is a traditional importer of oranges from third countries, no substitution of Community oranges by imported oranges has in fact occurred.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1132/96 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Gaseous pollutant emissions from internal combustion engines
Date: 1996-05-13
Institutions: AMADEO, European Parliament
Subjects: air quality, approval, approximation of laws, combustion gases, competence of the Member States, engine, environmental protection













EUR-Lex - 91996E1132 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1132

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1132/96 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Gaseous pollutant emissions from internal combustion engines  


Official Journal C 345 , 15/11/1996 P. 0032 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1132/96 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (13 May 1996)Subject: Gaseous pollutant emissions from internal combustion enginesIn connection with the proposal for a European Parliament and Council Directive on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the measures to be taken against the emission of gaseous and particulate pollutants from internal combustion engines to be installed in non-road mobile machinery (COM(95) 350 ((OJ C 328, 07.12.1995, p. 1. )),Will the Commission reach a firm decision on the penalties to be imposed on manufacturers who, once they have obtained type-approval for an engine, continue to manufacture engines of the same family which fail to comply with the characteristics registered and approved under the type-approval procedure?Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (2 July 1996)The proposal (for a Parliament and Council directive on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the measures to be taken against the emission of gaseous and particulate pollutants from internal combustion engines to be installed in non-road mobile machinery) lays down procedures in the case of non-conformity of the engines with the approved type (Article 13). It is up to the Member States to take the necessary measures to ensure that the engines in production conform to the approved type. The measures may extend to withdrawals of type-approvals (penalties).Therefore a decision of the Commission on the penalties to be imposed is superfluous.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1140/96 by Iñigo MÉNDEZ DE VIGO to the Commission. Register of products protected against imitation
Date: 1996-05-13
Institutions: European Parliament, MENDEZ DE VIGO
Subjects: designation of origin, foodstuff, location of production, product designation, product quality, trade-mark law













EUR-Lex - 91996E1140 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1140

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1140/96 by Iñigo MÉNDEZ DE VIGO to the Commission. Register of products protected against imitation  


Official Journal C 011 , 13/01/1997 P. 0006 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1140/96 by Iñigo Méndez de Vigo (PPE) to the Commission (13 May 1996)Subject: Register of products protected against imitationOn 6 March 1996 the Commission approved two proposals to the Council for regulations containing lists of agricultural food products which should be protected against imitation.Will the Commission say what products were included in this list? What criteria did the Commission use for selecting these products?Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (3 June 1996)On 6 March the Commission adopted the first proposal containing 320 names for registration as designations of origin or geographical indications under the procedure provided for in Article 17 of Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 ((OJ L 208, 24.7.1992. )) applying to names already protected or established by usage in Member States.The names proposed for registration are those recognized as conforming to Articles 2 and 4 of the Regulation following mature consideration by the Commission. Article 2 lays down definitions and criteria for 'designation of origin' and 'geographical indication.'In order to obtain the protection conferred by a designation of origin it has to be substantiated that the quality or characteristics of the product are essentially or exclusively due to the geographical environment, with its natural and human factors, and that production, processing and preparation take place in the defined geographical area.In order to obtain the protection conferred by a geographical indication it has to be substantiated that a specific quality, reputation or other characteristics are attributable to that geographical origin and that production, processing or preparation take place in the defined geographical area.Article 4 requires a specification with which a name seeking registration must comply.Note that under Article 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 names that have become generic may not be registered.The list of 320 names is being sent direct to the Honourable Member and the Secretariat of Parliament.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1083/96 by Richard HOWITT to the Commission. Leaded petrol
Date: 1996-05-13
Institutions: European Parliament, HOWITT
Subjects: air quality, carcinogenic substance, lead-free petrol, motor vehicle pollution, pollution control measures, public health













EUR-Lex - 91996E1083 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1083

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1083/96 by Richard HOWITT to the Commission. Leaded petrol  


Official Journal C 305 , 15/10/1996 P. 0044 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1083/96 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (13 May 1996)Subject: Leaded petrolWhat action has the Commission taken to investigate claims made by independent academics in both Italy and the UK that unleaded petrol, which contains a number of known carcinogens, poses a major health risk?Would a proposed carbon / energy tax be levied on unleaded petrol?Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (10 June 1996)The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question 3886/93 by Mr Bettini ((OJ C 289, 17.10.1994. )), E-27/94 by Mr Seligman ((OJ C 376, 30.12.1994. )) and E-629/95 by Mrs Muscardini ((OJ C 179, 13.7.1995. )), where it has expressed its opinion on the issue of unleaded petrol containing carcinogenic compounds.The Commission also indicated that it was in the process of preparing a legislative proposal on the quality of fuels (petrol and diesel) in order to reduce vehicle emissions and thereby contributing to the achievement of future Community air quality objectives. The technical basis for this proposal was provided by the results of the European auto-oil programme which have been brought to the attention of a number of members of the Parliament. The proposal foresees limit values for various environmentally important fuel parameters including the aromatic and benzene levels of unleaded petrol and is expected to be approved by the Commission by June 1996.Moreover, in its amended proposal of 1995 introducing carbon and energy taxation ((COM(95) 172 final. )), the Commission has included unleaded petrol under the scope of products subject to taxation.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1129/96 by Cristiana MUSCARDINI , Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Lease of the Hochtief building
Date: 1996-05-13
Institutions: AMADEO, European Parliament, MUSCARDINI
Subjects: EU institution, European Commission, Luxembourg, building, building industry, contract, supermarket













EUR-Lex - 91996E1129 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1129

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1129/96 by Cristiana MUSCARDINI , Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Lease of the Hochtief building  


Official Journal C 280 , 25/09/1996 P. 0117 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1129/96 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) and Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (13 May 1996)Subject: Lease of the Hochtief buildingThe Commission's answer to our Written Question E-0416/96 ((OJ C 183 of 24.6.1996, p. 30. )) seems odd.With regard to Point 1, the Commission should know that MEPs cannot refer written questions directly to governments or private companies.With regard to Point 4, can the Commission state whether, in its specifications for the construction of a building to accommodate 800 officials, it can permit the presence and practice of private commercial activities?How can the Commission impose its specifications on the builders, if it enters into a contract with them, when the building is already going up and includes a large hypermarket on the ground floor?Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (6 June 1996)While regretting procedural constraints, the Honourable Members are asked to bear in mind that the Commission cannot be a substitute for the parties to an agreement and provide information on their agreements.With regard to the specifications of a building, the Commission can decide to accept exceptions from the description of the standard building intended to house its departments. The Commission decides, case by case, whether individual items in the description are to be treated as mandatory.It is recalled that the Commission was assisted by an engineering consultancy firm for sixteen months and that several meetings took place with the builder. At these meetings details concerning Commission requirements were discussed.Moreover, in many buildings, the extent to which they meet the occupier's requirements can be increased even after completion of the work.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1050/96 by Alexandros ALAVANOS to the Commission. Establishment of an artificial kidney unit in the Cyclades
Date: 1996-05-13
Institutions: ALAVANOS, European Parliament
Subjects: Southern Aegean, illness, medical device, medical institution, new technology, urban centre













EUR-Lex - 91996E1050 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1050

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1050/96 by Alexandros ALAVANOS to the Commission. Establishment of an artificial kidney unit in the Cyclades  


Official Journal C 297 , 08/10/1996 P. 0076 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1050/96 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (13 May 1996)Subject: Establishment of an artificial kidney unit in the CycladesA very serious problem facing kidney patients is that they need to undergo haemodialysis in specialized hospitals on a daily basis. Kidney sufferers living on Greek islands, such as the Cyclades, are forced to move to the major urban centres, because most artificial kidney units are located there; thus these patients whose life is difficult enough anyway, are obliged to live far from their homes.Since new technologies (for example, the EURO-ISDN networks) could enable them to remain where they live, will the Commission say:1. Is provision made, under the multifund operational programme for the South Aegean region, for the funding of an artificial kidney unit in the Cyclades?2. What is the funding timetable for this programme?3. What is the take-up rate of resources for the above programme?Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (14 June 1996)1. There is no provision for part-financing artificial kidney units in the multifund operational programme (MOP) for the South Aegean devised as part of the 1994-99 Community support framework (CSF) for Greece. As a rule, regional multifund operations part-finance hospital infrastructure (e.g. buildings) but not equipment, the cost of which is generally met from the national budget and may be part-financed by the Health Services and Social Benefits operational programme for Greece under the 1994-99 CSF.2. The MOP for the South Aegean runs from 1994-99.3. The take-up rate is currently around 15%.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1120/96 by Terence WYNN to the Commission. European Community Investment Programme (ECIP)
Date: 1996-05-13
Institutions: European Parliament, WYNN
Subjects: European company, Mauritius, Morocco, economic support, financial institution, financial instrument













EUR-Lex - 91996E1120 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1120

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1120/96 by Terence WYNN to the Commission. European Community Investment Programme (ECIP)  


Official Journal C 297 , 08/10/1996 P. 0088 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1120/96 by Terence Wynn (PSE) to the Commission (13 May 1996)Subject: European Community Investment Programme (ECIP)Can the Commission provide information on European companies who receive funding from the ECIP, with particular reference to Morocco and Mauritius?Answer given by Mr Marin on behalf of the Commission (12 June 1996)The Commission is sending to the Honourable Member and to the General Secretariat of the Parliament the latest available European Community investment partners (ECIP) annual report (1994) and leaflet, the list of ECIP financial institutions and the eligible country list relating to the new ECIP Regulation ((Regulation (EC) No 213/96 of 29 January 1996 - OJ L 8, 6.2.1996 )).From this documentation it will be noted that Mauritius, being a member of the EC Convention, is not on the list of eligible countries for ECIP. Therefore no ECIP funds have been approved for Mauritius. As regards Morocco, from December 1988 until 30th April 1996, under the ECIP budget lines the Commission has approved 90 separate actions for ECIP budget financing of 7.6 Mecu. This figure of 90 actions breaks down into 36 under facility 1 for identification of projects and partners which benefit groups of Community companies and 54 actions under facilities 2,3 and 4 benefit individual companies.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1124/96 by Cristiana MUSCARDINI to the Commission. Free choice of health services
Date: 1996-05-13
Institutions: European Parliament, MUSCARDINI
Subjects: fundamental rights, health service, public health













EUR-Lex - 91996E1124 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1124

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1124/96 by Cristiana MUSCARDINI to the Commission. Free choice of health services  


Official Journal C 297 , 08/10/1996 P. 0089 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1124/96 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission (13 May 1996)Subject: Free choice of health servicesIf a citizen seeks recourse to an institution which is not part of the state structure of the National Health Service and has his or her application rejected, this constitutes a serious breach of the right to freedom of choice.Will the Commission intervene with a directive to give citizens the freedom to choose an organization providing health services, whether in the form of diagnosis, treatment or therapy?Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (10 June 1996)The Commission has no intention to propose legislation on the matters raised in the Honourable Member's question, as the organisation of national health systems is a matter for Member States.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1066/96 by Glyn FORD to the Commission. Proposed anti-dumping proceedings (96/C 50/04)
Date: 1996-05-13
Institutions: European Parliament, FORD
Subjects: anti-dumping legislation, cotton, import, textile product, third country













EUR-Lex - 91996E1066 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1066

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1066/96 by Glyn FORD to the Commission. Proposed anti-dumping proceedings (96/C 50/04)  


Official Journal C 280 , 25/09/1996 P. 0115 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1066/96 by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission (13 May 1996)Subject: Proposed anti-dumping proceedings (96/C 50/04)Has the Commission revised its intention to initiate anti-dumping proceedings concerning imports of unbleached cotton fabrics originating in the People's Republic of China, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Pakistan and Turkey in the light of evidence supplied to it by the Textile Finishers Association, and the submission on behalf of the dyers and finishers Naylor Jennings?Answer given by Sir Leon Brittan on behalf of the Commission (24 May 1996)The anti-dumping procedure concerning unbleached cotton fabrics originating in the People's Republic of China, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Pakistan and Turkey was initiated on 21 February 1996 after a complaint, submitted on behalf of the Community cotton producers by Eurocoton, containing sufficient prima facie evidence of dumping and injury, was lodged with the Commission on 8 January 1996.In accordance with Article 21 of the Basic anti-dumping regulation ((Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22.12.1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community - OJ L 56, 6.3.1996. )), the Commission will ensure that the views and submissions of all interested parties to the case, including those of the Textile finishers association and the company Naylor Jennings, are taken into account in determining if the Community interest is served by the introduction of measures.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1091/96 by Nikitas KAKLAMANIS to the Commission. Compensation for international road hauliers
Date: 1996-05-13
Institutions: European Parliament, KAKLAMANIS
Subjects: EU aid, Greece, civil war, financial loss, fresh fruit, fresh vegetable, indemnification, international road transport













EUR-Lex - 91996E1091 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1091

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1091/96 by Nikitas KAKLAMANIS to the Commission. Compensation for international road hauliers  


Official Journal C 297 , 08/10/1996 P. 0081 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1091/96 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission (13 May 1996)Subject: Compensation for international road hauliersIt has been brought to my attention by various publications in the Greek press and through my contacts with the Greek Federation of International Road Hauliers that compensation has been paid for financial loss incurred Greek transport companies owing to the war in former Yugoslavia.Will the Commission say:1. Which European Union regulation provides for aid for Greek transport companies to compensate for financial loss incurred due to the war in former Yugoslavia?2. Who received the compensation, which criteria were used and what is the overall amount of the compensation?3. Is it intended to renew the regulation or to extend it, given that the adverse effects of the war in former Yugoslavia are still very much in evidence?Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (12 June 1996)Since war broke out in Yugoslavia in 1991 until the end of 1995, the Commission has granted a flat-rate allowance to consignors lodging applications under Regulation (EC) No 811/95 ((OJ L 82, 12.4.1995. )) for the transport of Greek fruit and vegetables to the other Community Member States apart from Italy, Spain and Portugal.For consignments made in 1995, the allowance amounted to ECU 48.30 per tonne net weight.The Council is currently examining a proposal for a regulation extending this special measure to cover the first six months of 1996. ((COM(96) 142. )) The proposal was made by the Commission on account of the continuing difficulty of transport in the former Yugoslavia despite the cessation of hostilities.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1119/96 by Brian CROWLEY to the Commission. Applications for co-financing under R&D framework programme
Date: 1996-05-13
Institutions: CROWLEY, European Parliament
Subjects: manager, pay, research and development, scientific profession, shareholding, technical profession













EUR-Lex - 91996E1119 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1119

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1119/96 by Brian CROWLEY to the Commission. Applications for co-financing under R&D framework programme  


Official Journal C 345 , 15/11/1996 P. 0028 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1119/96 by Brian Crowley (UPE) to the Commission (13 May 1996)Subject: Applications for co-financing under R& D framework programmeWhat are the minimum and maximum staff rates charged by company participants/consultants under the EU third and fourth R& D framework programmes for (i) engineers, (ii) senior managers/administrators and (iii) researchers?Could the Commission also indicate an approximate average figure for the Cohesion countries and the four biggest Member States?Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (1 July 1996)As set out in Article 7 of the rules for the participation of undertakings, research centres and universities in research, technological development and demonstration activities of the Community (Council Decision 94/763/EC of 21 November 1994) ((OJ L 306, 30.11.1994. )), the Community financial participation usually consists of the reimbursement of a proportion of the actual costs of the research project including indirect overhead costs.As staff costs of a project, although important, are only an element of the total cost, and given the different criteria applied by participants as to the categories of staff, the Commission does not distinguish in its existing data base between the various elements of the total project cost and is thus not in a position to provide minimum or maximum staff rates or average staff rates by Member States or groups of Member States. It should however be noted that where possible contractors use rates accepted by Member State authorities with suitable adjustments to take into account any differences in funding arrangements.The appropriateness of the cost of the various elements which go to make up a project proposal, and the corresponding level of Community financial support, is however assessed during the evaluation of the proposal by independent experts, and is the subject of detailed examination during contract negotiations between the consortium participants and the Commission. In addition the Commission uses both its own staff and external organizations to audit both contracts and contractors.