do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1761/96 by Eva KJER HANSEN to the Commission. Commission's failure to apply Article 171(2) in regard to environmental matters
Date: 1996-07-03
Institutions: European Parliament, KJER HANSEN
Subjects: European Commission, environmental protection, fine, free service













EUR-Lex - 91996E1761 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1761

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1761/96 by Eva KJER HANSEN to the Commission. Commission's failure to apply Article 171(2) in regard to environmental matters  


Official Journal C 365 , 04/12/1996 P. 0030 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1761/96 by Eva Kjer Hansen (ELDR) to the Commission (3 July 1996)Subject: Commission's failure to apply Article 171(2) in regard to environmental mattersWhen will the Commission make use, for the first time, of the right to impose fines (pursuant to Article 171(2)) on Member States which the Court of Justice has found to be in breach of Community law but which have not complied with the Court's judgment?When will the Commission impose fines on the following countries which have all been adjudged, pursuant to Article 171, as failing to implement Community law?- The Netherlands, judgment of 17 September 1987 concerning protection of ground water,- Belgium, judgment of 14 January 1988 concerning protection of ground water,- Belgium, judgment of 4 June 1987 concerning biological control,- Germany, judgment of 3 July 1990 concerning protection of wild birds,- Belgium, judgment of 5 July 1990 concerning protection of drinking water,- Germany, judgment of 30 June 1991 concerning air quality,- Italy, judgment of 13 December 1990 concerning surplus zinc ore,- Belgium, judgment of 13 June 1990 concerning destruction of waste,- Luxembourg, judgment of 25 July 1991 concerning packaging of foodstuffs,- Belgium, judgment of 11 June 1991 concerning drinking water,- Italy, judgment of 13 December 1991 concerning toxic and hazardous waste,- Spain, judgment of 10 December 1991 concerning packaging of foodstuffs,- Greece, judgment of 7 April 1991 concerning toxic and hazardous waste,- Belgium, judgment of 5 May 1993 concerning ground water,- Germany, judgment of 10 May 1995 concerning toxic and hazardous waste,- Germany, judgment of 11 August 1995 concerning environmental impact assessment,- Belgium, judgment of 2 May 1996 concerning environmental impact assessment.Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (17 July 1996)The Commission has not yet taken any decision on the application of Article 171 of the EC Treaty. However, a decision on a number of such cases is imminent and the Commission will keep the Honourable Member informed on the outcome.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1800/96 by Joan VALLVÉ to the Commission. Appearance of Italian fishing vessels under flags of convenience
Date: 1996-07-03
Institutions: European Parliament, VALLVE
Subjects: EU waters, Italy, Mediterranean Sea, fishing controls, fishing net, fishing vessel, maritime surveillance, ship's flag, third country













EUR-Lex - 91996E1800 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1800

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1800/96 by Joan VALLVÉ to the Commission. Appearance of Italian fishing vessels under flags of convenience  


Official Journal C 385 , 19/12/1996 P. 0039 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1800/96 by Joan Vallvé (ELDR) to the Commission (3 July 1996)Subject: Appearance of Italian fishing vessels under flags of convenienceEU Regulation 345/92 ((OJ L 42, 18.2.1992, p. 15. )) unambiguously outlaws the use of driftnets longer than 2.5 km. The UN's Resolution 46/215 has similarly established a moratorium (theoretically in force since 31 December 1992) on the use of driftnets longer than 2.5 km.Parliament has on various occasions condemned the systematic breach of these resolutions, in particular by Italian fishing vessels. In reply to question 2087/95 ((OJ C 300, 13.11.1995, p. 44. )), the Commission stated that 648 Italian vessels were detected last year fishing illegally in the Mediterranean.In recent weeks Italian fishing vessels have been observed engaging in illegal activities under the flags of third countries (Albania, Croatia, Cyprus, etc) and subsequently unloading their catches in Italian ports, thus making a mockery of Community law.Can the Commission state whether it is aware of this situation? If so, does it intend to take any action?Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (6 September 1996)On the basis of the information available to the Commission, it cannot confirm the statement by the Honourable Member regarding Italian vessels registered in third countries such as Albania, Croatia and Cyprus using driftnets exceeding 2.5 km and landing their catches in Italy.The Commission will do its utmost to ensure that all Member States involved in the driftnet fishery enforce current Community legislation both with respect to vessels flying their own flag and those of third countries when fishing inside Community waters. To this end, the Commission chartered a vessel which operated as an inspection platform for national and Commission inspectors in the Mediterranean during the period 16 May-28 June 1996. Inspections carried out during that time revealed non-compliance with Council Regulation (EEC) No. 345/92. The Commission has received no reports of sightings of third country vessels using driftnets in the areas patrolled by the vessel (waters off the Balearic Islands, Ionian and Aegean Seas, the waters off Sicily and Sardinia and the Tyrrhenian Sea).
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1289/96 of 3 July 1996 amending Regulation (EEC) No 2179/92 laying down detailed rules for the application of the specific import measures for the Canary Islands as regards tobacco
Date: 1996-07-03
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Canary Islands, customs duties, import, tariff exemption, tobacco













EUR-Lex - 31996R1289 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



31996R1289

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1289/96 of 3 July 1996 amending Regulation (EEC) No 2179/92 laying down detailed rules for the application of the specific import measures for the Canary Islands as regards tobacco  


Official Journal L 165 , 04/07/1996 P. 0028 - 0029 





COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1289/96 of 3 July 1996 amending Regulation (EEC) No 2179/92 laying down detailed rules for the application of the specific import measures for the Canary Islands as regards tobaccoTHE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1601/92 of 15 June 1992 concerning specific measures for the Canary Islands with regard to certain agricultural products (1), as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2537/95 (2), and in particular Article 6 (2) thereof,Whereas Article 6 of Regulation (EEC) No 1601/92 provides for exemption from customs duties for direct imports into the Canary Islands of up to 20 000 tonnes of raw and semi-manufactured tobacco intended for the local manufacture of tobacco products;Whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2179/92 of 30 July 1992 laying down detailed rules for the application of the specific import measures for the Canary Islands as regards tobacco (3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1606/95 (4), lays down detailed rules for the application of that measure; whereas the products qualifying under the scheme should be itemized;Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Tobacco,HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:Article 1 The Annex to Regulation (EEC) No 2179/92 is replaced by the Annex to this Regulation.Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.It shall apply from 1 July 1996.This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.Done at Brussels, 3 July 1996.For the CommissionFranz FISCHLERMember of the Commission(1) OJ No L 173, 27. 6. 1992, p. 13.(2) OJ No L 260, 31. 10. 1995, p. 10.(3) OJ No L 217, 31. 7. 1992, p. 79.(4) OJ No L 153, 4. 7. 1995, p. 11.ANNEX Products eligible for exemption from customs duties on direct imports into the Canary Islands for the period 1 July 1996 to 30 June 1997 >TABLE>
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1738/96 by Antonio TAJANI to the Commission. Urban programme
Date: 1996-07-03
Institutions: European Parliament, TAJANI
Subjects: EU aid, EU financing, European Commission, Italy, action programme, adoption of the budget, project management, urban area, urbanisation













EUR-Lex - 91996E1738 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1738

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1738/96 by Antonio TAJANI to the Commission. Urban programme  


Official Journal C 322 , 28/10/1996 P. 0102 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1738/96 by Antonio Tajani (UPE) to the Commission (3 July 1996)Subject: Urban programmeOn 15 February 1995 the Italian Government announced its approval of the list of 13 cities selected for aid under the Urban programme in Italy.On 12 December 1995, in its reply to Written Question P-3181/95 ((OJ C 79, 18.3.1996, p. 57. )), the Commission undertook to approve the programme without delay so as to make the funds available as soon as possible.The projects to renovate the urban areas in question are a matter of urgency, particularly those affecting Rome (i.e. improvements to the Tor Bella Monaca and Torre Angela areas), which is preparing for the Jubilee in the year 2000 and the possibility of the Olympic Games being held there in 2004.It has now been one year four months since the Italian Government formally approved the list of cities to be taken into consideration for aid under the Urban initiative.Given the above, why has the Commission not yet approved the projects submitted and when will the funds earmarked for Italy finally be made available?Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (23 July 1996)The Commission wishes to inform the Honourable Member that the programme for Italy under the Community Urban Initiative was adopted on 30 April; the first commitments have already been made and the relevant funds made available.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1798/96 by David BOWE to the Commission. Internal market for electricity
Date: 1996-07-03
Institutions: BOWE, European Parliament
Subjects: advisory committee (EU), consumer movement, electrical energy, employer, energy policy, labour market, public service, single market, trade union













EUR-Lex - 91996E1798 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1798

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1798/96 by David BOWE to the Commission. Internal market for electricity  


Official Journal C 365 , 04/12/1996 P. 0035 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1798/96 by David Bowe (PSE) to the Commission (3 July 1996)Subject: Internal market for electricityDoes the Commission think that consultative structures for the electricity sector should be set up, so that employers and trade unions from the sector can meet to discuss the impact of the internal market for electricity on the public service, the environment, energy structures and employment. If not, can the Commission explain why not?Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission (16 September 1996)In line with the its white paper on energy policy ((COM(95) 682 final. )) the Commission intends to establish a consultative committee to include all organisations with an interest in the energy sector. This committee will bring together employers, trade unions and also consumer interest groups to discuss matters of energy policy which will no doubt include all subjects of the internal electricity market. The Commission does not consider it necessary to create specific parallel structures for the electricity sector only.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1743/96 by Cristiana MUSCARDINI to the Commission. Surveyors and industrial experts
Date: 1996-07-03
Institutions: European Parliament, MUSCARDINI
Subjects: professional qualifications, professional society, recognition of diplomas, right of establishment, socioprofessional category, technical profession, town-planning profession













EUR-Lex - 91996E1743 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1743

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1743/96 by Cristiana MUSCARDINI to the Commission. Surveyors and industrial experts  


Official Journal C 305 , 15/10/1996 P. 0119 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1743/96 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission (3 July 1996)Subject: Surveyors and industrial expertsAlthough Community regulations recognize the traditional rôles of engineers and architects, they do not recognize the professions of surveyors and industrial experts specializing in building, which creates significant confusion regarding the rôles of these two professional categories.Despite countless requests (for a professional register, for recognition, for legal equality, etc.) the EU had not so far managed to resolve the issue of recognition for the category of surveyor.Could the Commission draw up a directive to define the sphere of activity of surveyors and industrial experts and determine their rôles in areas such as:1. structural design, statistical calculations, supervision and book-keeping in respect of new buildings;2. book-keeping in respect of building work, standard health-related maintenance, preventive work and restructuring which does not require the use of reinforced concrete in renovation work on existing buildings;3. the drawing-up of town-planning schemes?Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (31 July 1996)The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to her Written Question E-85/95 ((OJ C 190, 24.7.1995. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1766/96 by Konstantinos HATZIDAKIS to the Commission. Commission information campaign directed at Turkish Cypriots concerning the benefits they will derive from the accession of Cyprus to the European Union
Date: 1996-07-03
Institutions: European Parliament, HATZIDAKIS
Subjects: Cyprus, Türkiye, accession to the European Union, military occupation, public international law













EUR-Lex - 91996E1766 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1766

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1766/96 by Konstantinos HATZIDAKIS to the Commission. Commission information campaign directed at Turkish Cypriots concerning the benefits they will derive from the accession of Cyprus to the European Union  


Official Journal C 365 , 04/12/1996 P. 0016 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1766/96 by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE) to the Commission (3 July 1996)Subject: Commission information campaign directed at Turkish Cypriots concerning the benefits they will derive from the accession of Cyprus to the European UnionUnder the decision of the General Affairs Council of 6 March 1995, the Commission should take steps, within the framework of consultations with the Cypriot Government, to inform Turkish Cypriots about the benefits they will derive from the accession of Cyprus to the European Union.Can the Commission state what action it has so far taken, and what action it intends to take in future, to inform Turkish Cypriots about this matter? Can it also say what specific measures it intends to take to ensure that, in compliance with UN Security Council Resolutions 541/83 and 550/84 and the European Union's consistent position vis-à-vis Cyprus, this information campaign does not lead to the establishment of institutional ties with bodies representing the illegal occupying regime?Joint answer to Written Questions E-1656/96 and E-1766/96 given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (27 September 1996)Community policy concerning the information activities for the Turkish Cypriot community was determined by the Council's conclusions of 6 March 1995: 'Cyprus's accession to the European Union should bring increased security and prosperity to both communities on the island'. The Council further considered that 'this community must perceive the advantages of the European Union accession more clearly and its concerns at the prospect must be allayed'. The Commission was invited to 'organize the requisite contacts to this end with the Turkish Cypriot community in consultation with the government of Cyprus'.The Commission, accordingly has implemented a series of information activities, both in Brussels and in Cyprus, in consultation with the Cypriot government.The Commission does not consider that this initiative deviates from the Community's consistent policy concerning Cyprus and in particular the full respect of the United Nations resolutions mentioned by the Honourable Member.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1763/96 by Ria OOMEN-RUIJTEN to the Commission. Storage of radioactive material
Date: 1996-07-03
Institutions: European Parliament, OOMEN-RUIJTEN
Subjects: North Rhine-Westphalia, environmental protection, frontier region, health risk, public health, radioactive waste, storage of waste













EUR-Lex - 91996E1763 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1763

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1763/96 by Ria OOMEN-RUIJTEN to the Commission. Storage of radioactive material  


Official Journal C 365 , 04/12/1996 P. 0031 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1763/96 by Ria Oomen-Ruijten (PPE) to the Commission (3 July 1996)Subject: Storage of radioactive materialRadioactive material is not infrequently stored near the borders of a Member State, for example in Ahaus in North Rhine-Westphalia.What is the Commission's view of this practice, which can be found in several Member States, what steps does it intend to take to curb this practice and does it agree that Community cooperation is needed in such cases, in order to give the affected citizens in the neighbouring State an effective say?Joint answer to Written Questions E-1762/96, E-1763/96 and E-1764/96 given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (16 September 1996)All Member States operate interim storage facilities for radioactive waste, pending availability of final disposal facilities for certain categories or all types of waste. Member States are responsible for licensing and control of these installations, but protection of the population in the Member State and the Member States has to be in line with the provisions of the Basic radiation protection safety standards (Council Directives 80/836 and 84/467 Euratom). Permissible doses have been lowered in the recently adopted standards (Council Directive 96/29/Euratom) which has to be implemented in national regulations before 13 May 2000.Article 37 of the Euratom Treaty requires that each Member State provides the Commission with data relating to any plan of disposal of radioactive waste when implementation may lead to contamination of the water, soil or airspace of another Member State. In its recommendation of 7 December 1990 (91/4/Euratom) on the application of Article 37, the Commission proposes to include storage facilities in this procedure.The proposed revision to Council Directive 85/337/EEC on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment ((OJ L 175, 5.7.1985. )) not only includes interim storage facilities but also incorporates more detailed procedural requirements on transboundary consultations where a project proposed in one Member State is likely to have a significant effect on the environment of another Member State. If adopted in their present form by the Council, however, these new provisions will still only apply to applications for development consent submitted to a competent authority on or after the date for transposition by Member States set out in the revised directive.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1778/96 by Ian WHITE to the Commission. Baby milk
Date: 1996-07-03
Institutions: European Parliament, WHITE
Subjects: European Commission, United Kingdom, baby food, exchange of information, food inspection, foodstuffs legislation, milk, product quality, public health













EUR-Lex - 91996E1778 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1778

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1778/96 by Ian WHITE to the Commission. Baby milk  


Official Journal C 322 , 28/10/1996 P. 0088 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1778/96 by Ian White (PSE) to the Commission (3 July 1996)Subject: Baby milkAt the end of May 1996, the British press reported that the European Commission had cleared nine brands of British-made baby milk of having an unacceptably high level of phthalates and indicated that they did not constitute a danger to adult or baby health. Such clearance was reported as having been achieved within a forty-eight hour period.Would the Commission please state:-1. The brand names of those products which are alleged to have been cleared.2. The basis upon which such 'clearance' was made.3. The names and addresses of the Commission laboratories or authorized Commission laboratories in which any scientific tests were conducted.4. The scientific basis upon which such 'clearance' was made.5. Confirmation that scientific tests upon the products concerned were actually carried out.6. The legal basis on which the Commission was asked to act in this matter.Joint answer to Written Questions E-1593/96 and E-1778/96 given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (19 July 1996)Following reports in the British media, on 28 May 1996 the Commission, of its own initiative, requested the United Kingdom contact point in the Community rapid alert system to provide information about the levels of phthalates found in infant formulae and the methods of analysis used. The United Kingdom contact point responded to that request on 29 May 1996. All the information provided to the Commission has been made available to the public by the United Kingdom authorities. The information concerns a number of baby foods on the British market, some of which are produced in the other Member States.The other Member States were also asked to provide any available information about levels of phthalates in infant formulae and baby foods.The information provided by the United Kingdom, and information provided by certain other Member States, was evaluated by the scientific committee for food at its meeting of 5-6 June 1996. The committee concluded that the levels of phthalates found were not a cause of public health concern. The Commission will transmit the opinion of the committee directly to the Honourable Members and to the Parliament's Secretariat.The opinion of the scientific committee for food was based on the information provided by Member States on the levels of phthalates found in infant formulae and baby foods. The Commission did not undertake any additional scientific tests or studies.