do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1059/96 by Carlos ROBLES PIQUER to the Commission. Cooperation between the European Union and UNESCO
Date: 1996-05-13
Institutions: European Parliament, ROBLES PIQUER
Subjects: EU financing, Unesco, international cooperation, project management













EUR-Lex - 91996E1059 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1059

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1059/96 by Carlos ROBLES PIQUER to the Commission. Cooperation between the European Union and UNESCO  


Official Journal C 297 , 08/10/1996 P. 0079 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1059/96 by Carlos Robles Piquer (PPE) to the Commission (13 May 1996)Subject: Cooperation between the European Union and UNESCOOn 27 February 1996 an agreement was apparently signed between the Vice-President of the Commission, Mr Marín, and the Director-General of UNESCO, Mr Mayor Zaragoza. Under the agreement the Commission is to subsidize measures carried out by UNESCO at the suggestion of its member states.Assuming that this agreement may be useful for the EU, can the Commission supply information about its terms, the implications for the Community budget, the advantages for the Union, the background to the agreement, some of the projects envisaged in it and say what form of participation there will be for the European Parliament in the approval and monitoring of the agreement?Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission (12 June 1996)The document signed in Brussels on 27 February 1996 entitled 'Provisions on cooperation between the Commission of the European Communities and Unesco, complementing the exchanges of letters between the two parties of 2 and 15 September 1964 and of 12 December 1972 and 14 February 1973' was based on Article 229 of the EC Treaty.It does not provide for specific Community subsidies for measures undertaken by Unesco. It consists of two distinct parts: the first is political and reiterates the commitment to cooperation confirmed by the exchanges of letters; the second is in the form of a specimen financing agreement between the Commission and Unesco and includes the general provisions applicable henceforth to all financing agreements between the Community and Unesco.The document does not, therefore, entail a specific financial obligation chargeable to the Community budget. It should, however, help facilitate future cooperation between the Community and Unesco by reducing considerably the time and energy devoted to the negotiation of financing agreements for specific projects financed by the Community budget and implemented by Unesco.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1100/96 by José APOLINÁRIO to the Commission. Enlargement - assessment of fulfilment of the economic and political conditions for the accession of Central and Eastern European countries adopted in Copenhagen
Date: 1996-05-13
Institutions: APOLINARIO, European Parliament
Subjects: EC opinion, European Commission, European Council, associated country, economic analysis, enlargement of the Union













EUR-Lex - 91996E1100 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1100

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1100/96 by José APOLINÁRIO to the Commission. Enlargement - assessment of fulfilment of the economic and political conditions for the accession of Central and Eastern European countries adopted in Copenhagen  


Official Journal C 297 , 08/10/1996 P. 0083 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1100/96 by José Apolinário (PSE) to the Commission (13 May 1996)Subject: Enlargement - assessment of fulfilment of the economic and political conditions for the accession of Central and Eastern European countries adopted in CopenhagenIn the course of 1996 the Commission is to consult the associated countries of Central and Eastern Europe on the basis of a questionnaire chiefly designed to assess the fulfilment of the economic and political requirements for the accession of these countries to the European Union as adopted in Copenhagen.Up to now, the Commission has not provided specific information to the Member States on the content of this document. Even though this consultation of candidate countries, which has also taken place in connection with previous enlargements, is the responsibility of the Commission, it would be of interest to know what are the immediate objectives and content of the questionnaire, and in particular whether it will be used only in drawing up opinions on applications for membership or also in drawing up the documents requested in Madrid so that an in-depth assessment might be made of the impact of enlargement?Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (13 June 1996)The Copenhagen European Council in June 1993 defined the economic and political conditions to be satisfied for the accession of associated countries from Central and Eastern Europe. The opinions which the Commission will give on the applications of the associated countries to join the Union, as soon as possible after the conclusion of the inter-governmental conference, will provide an evaluation of the situation of the countries in relation to these criteria.The questionnaires, which were presented to the governments of the associated countries on 26 April 1996, are designed to obtain the necessary information for that evaluation. They include questions of a factual and technical nature concerning all the main areas of the acquis communautaire. The applicant countries are asked to reply to the questionnaire within three months.The Commission intends to make use of the information obtained from the replies to the questionnaires, among other sources, when it draws up the other papers requested by the Madrid European Council.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1104/96 by Stylianos PANAGOPOULOS to the Commission. Terrorist attack on Greek tourists in Cairo
Date: 1996-05-13
Institutions: European Parliament, PANAGOPOULOS
Subjects: Egypt, development aid, economic consequence, foreign policy, peacekeeping, public safety, terrorism, tourism













EUR-Lex - 91996E1104 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1104

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1104/96 by Stylianos PANAGOPOULOS to the Commission. Terrorist attack on Greek tourists in Cairo  


Official Journal C 297 , 08/10/1996 P. 0083 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1104/96 by Stylianos Panagopoulos (PSE) to the Commission (13 May 1996)Subject: Terrorist attack on Greek tourists in CairoThe terrorist attack on the Hotel Europa in Cairo on the morning of 18 April 1996, which resulted in the death of 18 Greek nationals and the wounding of 14 others, has again focused attention on the safety of tourists from the European Union travelling to third countries. Once more over the Easter period, mankind mourns the unjust death of innocent people who fall victims to perverse fanaticism.1. What is the Commission's response to such acts of terrorism?2. What measures will it take to protect European Union citizens who travel to third countries as tourists?Answer given by Mr Marin on behalf of the Commission (30 May 1996)The presidency of the Union issued a declaration on 22 April 1996 condemning the terrorist attack against Greek tourists, expressing its deepest condolences to the families of the victims, and confirming the determination of the Union to confront terrorism decisively in all its forms.This latest shocking terrorist act is not only distressing due to the high number of human lives which have been lost but also due to the negative consequences that it may have for the Egyptian economy, in particular tourism, which seemed to be recovering after a period of relative calm.The presidency of the Union wrote to the Greek foreign minister on 18 April 1996 expressing its sincere sympathy and moral support. The Union will continue with its efforts to reactivate the Middle East peace process and to boost regional development in the Middle East and Egypt.The Sharm Al-Sheikh summit of peacemakers of 13 March 1996, was organised against the background of the latest wave of attacks against Israelis. Both at the summit and during the subsequent meetings that have taken place gathering all twenty nine participants, the Union and the Commission have further reaffirmed their commitment to fight all acts of terrorism, whatever their motives and whoever the perpetrators, and to increase their co-ordination in this respect.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1126/96 by Cristiana MUSCARDINI to the Commission. Type-approval of motor-vehicle components
Date: 1996-05-13
Institutions: European Parliament, MUSCARDINI
Subjects: EC Directive, European standard, approval, harmonisation of standards, motor vehicle, motor vehicle pollution, noise pollution, two-wheeled vehicle













EUR-Lex - 91996E1126 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1126

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1126/96 by Cristiana MUSCARDINI to the Commission. Type-approval of motor-vehicle components  


Official Journal C 305 , 15/10/1996 P. 0053 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1126/96 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission (13 May 1996)Subject: Type-approval of motor-vehicle componentsThe need to harmonize type-approval procedures for motor vehicles, in addition to the need to reduce noise and atmospheric pollution levels and combat the practice of tampering, is the basis for the proposal for a directive COM(93) 449 final ((OJ C 177, 29.06.1994, p. 1. )).Two-wheeled vehicles would seem to offer a guaranteed solution in the fight against the traffic congestion which afflicts Europe's cities; however, the Commission's proposals in the directive are aimed in the opposite direction.As the manufacture of motor cycles and mopeds becomes increasingly out of reach economically, a growing percentage of the population are turning to the car.Can the Commission therefore take steps to amend the excessively low noise and emission limit values laid down in the directive for models currently on the market which would require major changes in the manufacturing process?Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (3 June 1996)As the Honourable Member says, the proposal for a directive on two or three-wheeled motor vehicles, which still need to be regulated for the implementation of the type-approval procedure, is necessary both to harmonize the diverging laws of the Member States and to ensure that the environment is adequately protected, both against air pollution and against noise pollution.Since the technological means of meeting the proposed requirements were available on the dates scheduled and the cost-benefit ratio was positive, the proposal received the backing of the majority of experts from the Member States and industry.The Commission would point out that most of the amendments proposed by Parliament at the first reading were accepted by the Commission and the Council in the common position adopted on 23 November 1995.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1127/96 by Cristiana MUSCARDINI to the Commission. Extension of the Jean Monnet Centre
Date: 1996-05-13
Institutions: European Parliament, MUSCARDINI
Subjects: European Commission, European official, Luxembourg, occupational safety, public building, shopping centre, working conditions, workplace













EUR-Lex - 91996E1127 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1127

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1127/96 by Cristiana MUSCARDINI to the Commission. Extension of the Jean Monnet Centre  


Official Journal C 297 , 08/10/1996 P. 0090 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1127/96 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission (13 May 1996)Subject: Extension of the Jean Monnet CentreIn its answer to Written Question E-0415/96 ((OJ C 217, 26.7.1996, p. 36)) by the honourable Member Mr Marco Cellai, the Commission does not reply in full to Point 1 which asks whether it is true that an option has been requested for the plot of land earmarked for the expansion of the Jean Monnet Building.In answer to Point 3, the Commission states that the expenditure on the specifications and on the supervision of the construction of the Hochtief building is still necessary.Will the Commission answer the following questions:1. why are large sums of money being spent to examine the specifications when we know that the Hochtief building is to include a vast hypermarket on the ground floor?2. Do the Commission's specifications provide for the presence in the same building of extensive private commercial premises and offices for 800 officials?3. Is it necessary to spend money on checking this point in the specifications?Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (6 June 1996)The Commission has confirmed that it is interested in one day having a building on the nearest possible site to the existing building. But no project relating to the extension of the Jean Monnet building has been approved, and no option has been formally requested.With regard to necessary expenditure, the main aim of analysing the specifications and monitoring the construction of the Hochtief building is to enable the Commission to ensure that the necessary conditions for housing its staff are met.The Commission wants to assure itself that the shopping areas and the areas it occupies are totally separate and that the closeness of those areas will not be prejudicial to the safety and working conditions of officials. The same precautions are taken when city-centre buildings adjoin premises of third parties.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1072/96 by Richard HOWITT to the Commission. Fishing issues in Essex and Kent
Date: 1996-05-13
Institutions: European Parliament, HOWITT
Subjects: EU aid, South East (England), common fisheries policy, competence of the Member States, conservation of fish stocks, fishing fleet, fishing vessel, industrial fishing, modernisation aid, national law













EUR-Lex - 91996E1072 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1072

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1072/96 by Richard HOWITT to the Commission. Fishing issues in Essex and Kent  


Official Journal C 345 , 15/11/1996 P. 0027 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1072/96 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (13 May 1996)Subject: Fishing issues in Essex and KentWhy are decommissioning monies paid to owners on resale of boats not on retirement, when many take the money and use it to purchase another boat with an allocation? Is this not contrary to a proper use of public money to assist people to leave the industry, rather than to subsidize their increasing profitability with a newer vessel?Joint answer to Written Questions E-1071/96, E-1072/96 and E-1073/96 given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (6 June 1996)Community aid is provided for measures adopted in Community programmes for fisheries within the framework of Regulation (EC) No 3699/93 of 21 December 1993 ((OJ L 346, 31.12.1993. )). Individual fisheries projects, including construction or modernisation of fishing vessels cited by the Honourable Member are considered by the Member State in accordance with the programme indicated above and having regard to the capacity reduction targets fixed in the multiannual guidance programmes (MAGP) for the United Kingdom fishing fleet.The Commission does not feel that the above-mentioned measures favour construction or modernisation of vessels of a particular length, design or type of fishing gear. Also, it is not correct to say that incentives are used to finance new constructions under 10 metres in length to avoid conservation or territorial limits.The purpose of a measure such as decommissioning is to reduce fishing capacity in line with MAGP targets. The United Kingdom decommissioning scheme requires the surrender and suppression of the licence attached to the decommissioned vessel. The fleet capacity is, therefore, reduced irrespective of whether the owner purchases another existing licence or not. The measure satisfies the purpose for which it was introduced by reducing the size of the United Kingdom fishing fleet.Provided that national legislation does not contravene the fundamental principles of the EC Treaty, in particular the prohibition of discrimination, and provided that exemptions from taxation do not amount to unlawful state aids, Community law cannot interfere with the autonomy of a Member State in matters of taxation. Member States can apply their own social and fiscal law in relation to matters of income, as long as they are in conformity with the Treaty and the aims of the common fisheries policy are not impeded.
Council Directive 96/30/EC of 13 May 1996 amending Directive 94/80/EC 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
Date: 1996-05-13
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Austria, EU national, Finland, Sweden, local election, right to vote













EUR-Lex - 31996L0030 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



31996L0030

Council Directive 96/30/EC of 13 May 1996 amending Directive 94/80/EC 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  


Official Journal L 122 , 22/05/1996 P. 0014 - 0014 





COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 96/30/EC of 13 May 1996 amending Directive 94/80/EC 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 nationalsTHE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 8b (1) thereof,Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (1),Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee (2),Whereas the Annex to Council Directive 94/80/EC 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 (3), lists the basic local government units in each Member State;Whereas, pursuant to the accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden, the Annex to Directive 94/80/EC should be so amended as to provide a reference to the basic local government units of these three countries;Whereas, pursuant to the Act of Accession of those countries, Directive 94/80/EC is applicable to the Åland islands, where Finnish nationals who do not enjoy regional citizenship of those islands and nationals of the other Member States of the Union are subject to the same condition relating to the period of residence for the exercise of the right to vote and to stand as candidates in municipal elections,HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:Article 1 In the Annex to Directive 94/80/EC the following shall be added:'in Austria:Gemeinden, Bezirke in der Stadt Wienin Finland:kunta, kommun, kommun på Ålandin Sweden:kommuner, landsting.`Article 2 This Directive shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.Article 3 This Directive is addressed to the Member States.Done at Brussels, 13 May 1996.For the CouncilThe PresidentS. AGNELLI(1) OJ No C 65, 4. 3. 1996, p. 201.(2) Opinion delivered on 29 February 1996 (not yet published in the Official Journal).(3) OJ No L 368, 30. 12. 1994, p. 38.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1051/96 by Susan WADDINGTON to the Commission. Age discrimination in the Community institutions' recruitment policies
Date: 1996-05-13
Institutions: European Parliament, WADDINGTON
Subjects: competition (EU), equal treatment, professional qualifications, recruitment, regulations for civil servants













EUR-Lex - 91996E1051 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1051

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1051/96 by Susan WADDINGTON to the Commission. Age discrimination in the Community institutions' recruitment policies  


Official Journal C 297 , 08/10/1996 P. 0077 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1051/96 by Susan Waddington (PSE) to the Commission (13 May 1996)Subject: Age discrimination in the Community institutions' recruitment policiesIt appears from recent advertisements that the Commission is continuing to operate an ageist recruitment policy despite having over the years given many undertakings that this situation would change ((Independent on Sunday, 18/2/96 )).In light of the Commission's opinion to the IGC, which recommends the introduction into the Treaties of 'provisions banning discrimination of any kind', will it now be changing its recruitment policy?Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (5 June 1996)Like the other Community institutions, the Commission applies age limits for participation in competitions to recruit officials, in accordance with Annex III to the Staff Regulations.Article 27 of the Staff Regulations states that recruitment should be directed to securing for the institution the services of officials of the highest standard of ability, efficiency and integrity, recruited on the broadest possible geographical basis from among nationals of the Member States. Officials must be selected without reference to race, creed or sex.Experience in recent years has shown that the use of age limits is a significant factor in ensuring both a better geographical balance and a better ratio of men to women among candidates taking part in competitions. This is especially true of competitions for the starting grades, and in particular for A8 assistant administrators, given that mobility declines with age. Without age limits the influx of candidates from the local labour market might skew the distribution of participants and successful candidates. It is also clear that young women are more mobile and more inclined to apply for competitions before they have family commitments. These trends were also observed during the organization of the A competitions for Austrian, Finnish and Swedish nationals in 1995.These considerations, particularly as regards careers, explain the Commission's use of age limits.Following the conclusions of the tripartite group, inter-institutional cooperation in the organization of competitions will be stepped up. This means that all aspects of recruitment policy, including the age limits specified in the notices of competitions, will have to be dealt with in the context of this cooperation.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1143/96 by Elly PLOOIJ-VAN GORSEL to the Commission. Eureka evaluation report not available in all official languages
Date: 1996-05-13
Institutions: European Parliament, PLOOIJ-VAN GORSEL
Subjects: EU publication, project evaluation, report













EUR-Lex - 91996E1143 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1143

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1143/96 by Elly PLOOIJ-VAN GORSEL to the Commission. Eureka evaluation report not available in all official languages  


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





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1143/96 by Elly Plooij-van Gorsel (ELDR) to the Commission (13 May 1996)Subject: Eureka evaluation report not available in all official languagesThe Eureka evaluation report is available from the Commission in five languages: English, French, German, Italian and Spanish.1. Why has this report not been translated into all 11 official languages?2. Why is the Commission issuing the report in Spanish and Italian, but not in Dutch?Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (2 July 1996)It is normal for EUREKA documents to be available in five languages (English, French, German, Italian and Spanish). However, the assessment report drawn up by the French Presidency in 1993 is available only in French and English, and the assessment reports drawn up under the Dutch (1991) and Swiss (1995) presidencies are only available in English by the decision of those same presidencies.The Honourable Member is reminded that EUREKA is not a Community programme but a 25-member inter-governmental initiative where the Commission represents the Community. Thus the Commission is not involved in selecting the languages in which those reports are published but may, like any other EUREKA member, be contacted where documents and reports are requested.