do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1479/96 by Alexandros ALAVANOS to the Commission. Progress with sub-programme 3, Ionian Islands, Measure 2 of the 2nd CSF: 'Health and Welfare' (SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER)
Date: 1996-06-12
Institutions: ALAVANOS, European Parliament
Subjects: Community support framework, Ionian Islands, distribution of aid, health policy, health service, medical centre, medical institution, modernisation aid, operational programme, regional aid













EUR-Lex - 91996E1479(01) - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1479(01)

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1479/96 by Alexandros ALAVANOS to the Commission. Progress with sub-programme 3, Ionian Islands, Measure 2 of the 2nd CSF: 'Health and Welfare' (SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER)  


Official Journal C 072 , 07/03/1997 P. 0009 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1479/96 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (12 June 1996)Subject: Progress with sub-programme 3, Ionian Islands, Measure 2 of the 2nd CSF: 'Health and Welfare'Measure 3.2 of the regional operational programme for the Ionian Islands provides for funding of health and welfare facilities in the region comprising: improvement and expansion of hospitals and the construction of a new hospital in Corfu with a corresponding increase in the number of hospital beds; improvements to health centres and community clinics, improved facilities and the creation of new community clinics; supplying these hospitals and clinics with the necessary electronic and medical equipment.The breakdown of funding was ECU 2 320 000 for 1994 and ECU 4 350 000 for 1995.1. What was the take-up rate for 1994 and 1995?2. Have there been any delays in taking up the funds and, if so, what were the main reasons for them?3. Can the Commission provide details of the progress made with this measure?Supplementary answer to Written Questions E-1479/96, E-1480/96, E-1481/96, E-1482/96, E-1484/96 and E-1485/96 given by Mme Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (8 November 1996)Further to its answer of 26 June 1996 ((OJ C 280, 25.9.1996, p. 126. )), the Commission can now provide the following details.Funding in 1994 and 1995 for the 'Health and Welfare' measure of the operational programmes (OP) referred to totalled ECU 72.1 million. The take-up over the same period was ECU 10.13 million. As the programmes started at the end of 1994, the funds were actually taken up in 1995.Most of the financing under this measure goes on projects to build large hospitals. These require major planning, study and preparatory work before construction or equipment purchases can go ahead, hence the take-up delay in 1995.Much of the preparatory work has been completed this year and work has started on building some hospitals. Consequently, an increase in the take-up of funding can now be expected. The Commission is closely monitoring this measure in both the regional and 'Health and Welfare' operational programmes.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1489/96 by Alexandros ALAVANOS to the Commission. Suspension of third instalment of state aid to Olympic Airways
Date: 1996-06-12
Institutions: ALAVANOS, European Parliament
Subjects: Greece, State aid, early retirement, pension scheme, suspension of aid, transport company













EUR-Lex - 91996E1489 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1489

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1489/96 by Alexandros ALAVANOS to the Commission. Suspension of third instalment of state aid to Olympic Airways  


Official Journal C 305 , 15/10/1996 P. 0102 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1489/96 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (12 June 1996)Subject: Suspension of third instalment of state aid to Olympic AirwaysPursuant to the Commission's decision of 30 April 1996, payment of the third instalment of state aid to Olympic Airways to increase the company's capital as part of its restructuring process has been suspended. The main reason for suspending payment is that the company has received Drs 11 billion from the national budget to subsidize pensions for staff taking early retirement.The government has responded to the suspension by claiming that the manner in which the relevant decisions have been formulated in law (No. 2271794) gives the impression that the sums in question are state aid, whereas they could be regarded as social assistance. In view of this:1. Will the Commission reconsider its decision, and2. will it say what other problems it has encountered during implementation of the Olympic Airways restructuring programme?Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission (23 July 1996)In its decision of 30 April 1996, the Commission reopened the Article 93(2) EC Treaty proceedings concerning aids granted to Olympic Airways which had been approved in a previous decision of 7 October 1994. It also opened the same proceedings concerning new aids that had been identified during the verification process prior to the payment of the second tranche of the approved aid. The Commission is now awaiting comments from the Greek government as well as other Member States and other interested parties in the framework of these proceedings. It will reach a final decision on all the aids taking into account all the relevant elements.The reason for the Commission decision of 30 April 1996 is that certain conditions of its decision of 7 October 1994 have not been respected. A new aid of 11,000 million drachmas was given to Olympic Airways by the Greek government to counterbalance an improvement of the retirement conditions of the Olympic employees decided upon by the Greek Parliament. The attention of the Honourable Member is drawn to the fact that, from a legal point of view, the social character of an aid has no effect on its nature as state aid.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1494/96 by Jaak VANDEMEULEBROUCKE to the Commission. Recruitment procedures
Date: 1996-06-12
Institutions: European Parliament, VANDEMEULEBROUCKE
Subjects: European Commission, European official, candidate, competition (EU), enlargement of the Union, recruitment













EUR-Lex - 91996E1494 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1494

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1494/96 by Jaak VANDEMEULEBROUCKE to the Commission. Recruitment procedures  


Official Journal C 322 , 28/10/1996 P. 0076 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1494/96 by Jaak Vandemeulebroucke (ARE) to the Commission (12 June 1996)Subject: Recruitment proceduresI understand that in recruitment procedures the Commission is increasingly taking the applicant's nationality into consideration. That criterion is even said to take priority over examination results.Can the Commission state if that is in fact the case? If so, does the Commission not consider that it is acting contrary to the prohibition on discrimination on grounds of nationality?Can the Commission inform me how many cases of judicial proceedings have been brought hitherto in this connection and in how many such cases judgment was given against the Commission?Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (12 July 1996)Article 27 of the Staff Regulations stipulates that 'recruitment shall be directed to securing for the institutions the services of officials of the highest standard of ability, efficiency and integrity, recruited on the broadest possible geographical basis from among nationals of Member States of the Communities.' It also states that no posts are to be reserved for nationals of any specific Member State. The Commission's recruitment policy complies with these requirements.In March 1995, Council Regulation 626/95 ((OJ L 66, 24.3.1995. )) was introduced allowing the institutions to derogate from the normal rules and to reserve posts for nationals of Austria, Sweden and Finland. Most of the recruitment competitions organised by the Commission in 1995-96 have been under this derogating Regulation.Apart from the exceptions allowed for the recruitment of nationals of the new Member States, the Commission ensures strict compliance with the abovementioned provisions of the Staff Regulations. In the extremely rare instances where the nationality of the candidate has been taken into account on recruitment the institution has been admonished by the Community courts. The Commission is willing to provide the Honourable Member with any information he may require on the cases concerned.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1434/96 by Johanna MAIJ-WEGGEN to the Commission. Human rights and democracy in Cuba
Date: 1996-06-12
Institutions: European Parliament, MAIJ-WEGGEN
Subjects: Cuba, EU aid, aid system, democracy, human rights, humanitarian aid, non-governmental organisation, use of aid













EUR-Lex - 91996E1434 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1434

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1434/96 by Johanna MAIJ-WEGGEN to the Commission. Human rights and democracy in Cuba  


Official Journal C 322 , 28/10/1996 P. 0066 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1434/96 by Johanna Maij-Weggen (PPE) to the Commission (12 June 1996)Subject: Human rights and democracy in Cuba1. Is the Commission aware of the very critical report by the Netherlands Pax Christi on the human rights situation and lack of democracy in Cuba?2. Is it aware that the ECU 15 million in humanitarian and food aid being sent to Cuba through ECHO, according to various sources, is only technically being sent to 'NGOs' but is in reality reaching military hospitals, tourist hotels and dollar shops?3. Does the Commission not consider that, in view of the repeated critical reports concerning this aid, an independent inquiry would be appropriate and is it prepared to set up such an inquiry?Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (2 July 1996)1. The Commission is indeed aware of the existence of the report referred to by the Honorary Member.2. To date neither the Commission's liason office in Havana, nor the NGOs involved in humanitarian operations financed by the Commission, have found any evidence that this aid is being diverted.The humanitarian aid funded by the Commission is distributed through a network of health centres selected by the Commission and covering the whole country. It should be stressed that the appraisal of the population's needs as well as the selection of those who are to benefit from aid (children, pregnant women, the elderly and the sick) has been carried out with the close cooperation of the NGOs working with the Commission.3. Humanitarian aid in Cuba has been the subject of evaluation and inspection missions and such missions are always independent. Furthermore, the presence of a Commission coordinator on the ground meant every stage of the operation was monitored.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1487/96 by Alexandros ALAVANOS to the Commission. Sheep and goat premiums for 1995
Date: 1996-06-12
Institutions: ALAVANOS, European Parliament
Subjects: Aegean Islands, EU aid, Greece, application of EU law, competence of the Member States, distribution of aid, goat, livestock farming, producer organisation, sheep













EUR-Lex - 91996E1487 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1487

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1487/96 by Alexandros ALAVANOS to the Commission. Sheep and goat premiums for 1995  


Official Journal C 345 , 15/11/1996 P. 0078 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1487/96 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (12 June 1996)Subject: Sheep and goat premiums for 1995The Evvia Stockbreeders Association claims that farmers and producers have not yet received their sheep and goat premiums for 1995.1. When were the sums in question approved?2. When were they disbursed?3. Should farmers have received them by now?4. If there have been delays, will it be possible to pay the appropriate interest?Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (3 July 1996)The definitive amount of the Community premium for ewes and she-goats referred to by the Honourable Member was set by the Commission for the 1995 marketing year on 2 February this year at ECU 24.281 per ewe producing heavy lambs and ECU 19.857 per she-goat and per ewe producing light lambs. In accordance with the rules, Greece must pay this premium by 15 October.The Commission would point out that at the end of June 1995 it offered Member States the option of making two advance payments of ECU 7 814 per ewe (heavy lambs) and ECU 6.251 per she-goat and ewe (light lambs). Since payment of these advances is optional, the decision has to be taken by the Member States' authorities, although a uniform rule must apply throughout a single Member State's territory.According to the information available to the Commission, between February and April this year Greece started to pay advances on the premium for an amount of ECU 69.6 million and part of the balance, for an amount of ECU 46.8 million.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1672/96 by Edith MÜLLER to the Commission. Selection procedure under framework research programme - Targeted Socio-Economic Research
Date: 1996-06-12
Institutions: European Parliament, MUELLER EDITH
Subjects: EU financing, economic policy, exchange of information, feasibility study, invitation to tender, project evaluation, research and development, self-employed person, social policy













EUR-Lex - 91996E1672 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1672

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1672/96 by Edith MÜLLER to the Commission. Selection procedure under framework research programme - Targeted Socio-Economic Research  


Official Journal C 322 , 28/10/1996 P. 0098 





WRITTEN QUESTION P-1672/96 by Edith Müller (V) to the Commission (12 June 1996)Subject: Selection procedure under framework research programme - Targeted Socio-Economic ResearchAccording to what criteria were the outside experts who examine the applications selected? What are the criteria for a favourable evaluation of the applications? In particular, what are the criteria for social innovation?How many projects are being subsidized after the first round and which countries are participating? How does the Commission plan to evaluate the large number of project proposals and to incorporate them in the future version of the research programme? What level of funding is represented by the individual projects currently in receipt of subsidy?Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (15 July 1996)Procedures for selecting experts to assess proposals for research and technological development activities submitted in response to open calls for proposals under the targeted socio-economic research programme follow the practice adopted by the Commission and the Council and outlined in the Commission's publication, 'EC-funded research and technological development'. Experts are chosen by the Commission from an extensive list of possible candidates suggested by the national members of the programme committee, scientific and professional bodies and organisations. When choosing experts, the Commission ensures that the individuals have the appropriate expertise and knowledge of the application areas.Criteria for evaluating proposals follow the advice given in the information package which accompanied the application forms. Foremost amongst these criteria are scientific and technical excellence and novelty, integrity and multi-cultural skills. The experts' assessments are taken fully into consideration when the Commission issues its decision on the selected proposals. There are no specific criteria for social innovation which is not treated separately.38 projects are being funded following the first call, involving some 308 partners (mostly higher education institutes) representing all Member States, Norway, and Switzerland. The total cost of the projects funded is approximately 24 MECU of which Community funding represents approximately 20 MECU.The Commission is accustomed to handling large number of proposals submitted in response to its calls. The general procedures are outlined in the publication mentioned above.