do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1797/96 by David BOWE to the Commission. Employment in the energy sector
Date: 1996-07-03
Institutions: BOWE, European Parliament
Subjects: competitiveness, electrical energy, electrical industry, energy industry, industrial development, labour market, single market













EUR-Lex - 91996E1797 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1797

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1797/96 by David BOWE to the Commission. Employment in the energy sector  


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





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1797/96 by David Bowe (PSE) to the Commission (3 July 1996)Subject: Employment in the energy sectorDoes the Commission think that it should take into account the consequences of the internal market for electricity for employment in the energy sector at its extraordinary meeting? If not, can the Commission explain why not?Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission (13 September 1996)The primary objective for completing the internal market, including the internal market for electricity, is to create growth and competitiveness in order to ensure a high level of employment for European citizens. European industry currently faces a disadvantage of up to 50% in terms of energy costs in comparison to the United States. At the level of the Community, the Commission is confident that the creation of the internal market will have a positive effect on employment. That is why the realisation of the internal electricity market forms part of the Commission's proposal for a European employment initiative.The Commission did not hold an extraordinary meeting on the subject of the internal electricity market.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1767/96 by Bryan CASSIDY to the Commission. Unfair competition on cross-channel ferry routes
Date: 1996-07-03
Institutions: CASSIDY, European Parliament
Subjects: English Channel, France, State aid, United Kingdom, economic survey, ferryboat, maritime transport, restriction on competition













EUR-Lex - 91996E1767 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1767

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1767/96 by Bryan CASSIDY to the Commission. Unfair competition on cross-channel ferry routes  


Official Journal C 385 , 19/12/1996 P. 0034 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1767/96 by Bryan Cassidy (PPE) to the Commission (3 July 1996)Subject: Unfair competition on cross-channel ferry routesIt has been alleged that the French government is subsidizing Britanny Ferries, a French owned cross-Channel ferry operator. This has led to British ferry companies not being able to compete on a fair basis. Some ferry companies have had to drop some of their ferry routes from my Euro-constituency in the UK because of this situation.Will the Commission investigate these allegations of unfair competition from French ferry operators and subsidies from the French government?If it is found that the French government are subsidizing French ferry operators can the Commission give assurances that it will start proceedings against the French government to stop this distortion in single market trade?Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission (5 September 1996)The Commission has already received a complaint about alleged state aid to Brittany Ferries and is urgently investigating the matter. There has been an exchange of correspondence with the French authorities but it is not yet clear whether aid will be made available to Brittany Ferries and, if so, on what basis. The Commission has recently asked the French authorities for further clarification of the position and it cannot assess the outcome of the investigation at this stage.The Commission is fully aware of the intense competition between the cross-Channel operators and the potential for any grant of state aid to distort that competition.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1749/96 by Michl EBNER to the Commission. Decentralized, federally organized civil protection and disaster planning
Date: 1996-07-03
Institutions: EBNER, European Parliament
Subjects: aid to disaster victims, civil defence, environmental risk prevention, natural disaster













EUR-Lex - 91996E1749 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1749

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1749/96 by Michl EBNER to the Commission. Decentralized, federally organized civil protection and disaster planning  


Official Journal C 356 , 25/11/1996 P. 0093 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1749/96 by Michl Ebner (PPE) to the Commission (3 July 1996)Subject: Decentralized, federally organized civil protection and disaster planningThere are still no uniform civil protection and disaster planning arrangements in the States of the European Union.Disaster planning is becoming increasingly important, as modern society and settlement in risky areas combine to increase the risk of natural disasters.Will the Commission state whether any initiatives are under way to develop plans for coping with disasters?Does it not consider that such plans should be developed, through local authorities and provincial or regional administrations, in a decentralized and federal form?Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (26 July 1996)In 1985 an initial Ministerial meeting laid the foundations for Community cooperation on civil protection. Since then, six resolutions have been adopted, which constitute the basis for such cooperation.Community cooperation is intended not only to support and back up the efforts made at national, regional and local level to prevent disasters, prepare those involved in civil protection and respond to disasters, but also to establish a framework for effective and rapid cooperation between Member States when needed.This cooperation is clearly inspired by the principle of subsidiarity. Measures have been taken only where the Community dimension provides an obvious advantage and where action will be most effective at Community level.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1288/96 of 3 July 1996 correcting Regulation (EC) No 917/96 amending Regulation (EC) No 2883/94 establishing a forecast balance for the supply to the Canary Islands of agricultural products covered by the specific measures provided for in Articles 2, 3, 4 and 5 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1601/92
Date: 1996-07-03
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Canary Islands, aid system, supply balance sheet, wine













EUR-Lex - 31996R1288 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



31996R1288

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1288/96 of 3 July 1996 correcting Regulation (EC) No 917/96 amending Regulation (EC) No 2883/94 establishing a forecast balance for the supply to the Canary Islands of agricultural products covered by the specific measures provided for in Articles 2, 3, 4 and 5 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1601/92  


Official Journal L 165 , 04/07/1996 P. 0026 - 0027 





COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1288/96 of 3 July 1996 correcting Regulation (EC) No 917/96 amending Regulation (EC) No 2883/94 establishing a forecast balance for the supply to the Canary Islands of agricultural products covered by the specific measures provided for in Articles 2, 3, 4 and 5 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1601/92THE 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 3 (4) and the second paragraph of Article 7 thereof,Whereas checks have revealed that the version of the Annex to Regulation (EC) No 917/96 (3) adopted by the Commission and published does not correspond to the version submitted to the Management Committee for opinion; whereas, therefore, that Regulation should be corrected,HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:Article 1 The Annex to Regulation (EC) No 917/96 is replaced by the Annex hereto.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 9 December 1995.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 123, 23. 5. 1996, p. 15.ANNEX 'ANNEX XIIPART BAmounts of aids granted>TABLE>
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1769/96 by Glyn FORD to the Commission. Rabid dogs
Date: 1996-07-03
Institutions: European Parliament, FORD
Subjects: domestic animal, rabies













EUR-Lex - 91996E1769 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1769

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1769/96 by Glyn FORD to the Commission. Rabid dogs  


Official Journal C 385 , 19/12/1996 P. 0034 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1769/96 by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission (3 July 1996)Subject: Rabid dogsCan the Commission reveal how many rabid dogs going into quarantine have been detected at EU borders each year for the last five years?Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (6 September 1996)There have been no cases detected at Community borders during the period mentioned by the Honourable Member.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1776/96 by Erich SCHREINER to the Commission. Article 157 of the Treaty on European Union and the example set by Commissioner Fischler
Date: 1996-07-03
Institutions: European Parliament, SCHREINER
Subjects: European cooperation, European official, administrative responsibility, holding of two jobs, pay, political executive, privilege, regulations for civil servants













EUR-Lex - 91996E1776 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1776

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1776/96 by Erich SCHREINER to the Commission. Article 157 of the Treaty on European Union and the example set by Commissioner Fischler  


Official Journal C 385 , 19/12/1996 P. 0035 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1776/96 by Erich Schreiner (NI) to the Commission (3 July 1996)Subject: Article 157 of the Treaty on European Union and the example set by Commissioner FischlerThe Members of the European Commission must guarantee their complete independence and are bound by the duty to refrain from accepting privileges (Article 157 of the TEU).How, then, can the Commission explain the fact that one of its Members, Mr Fischler, has been maintaining a political office at No. 8-10 Schenkenstrasse, Vienna, for over a year, whose rent and running costs are met by the Austrian Ministry of Agriculture and whose manager, Mrs M. Baumgartner, is paid by the Austrian Industrial Association?Will the Commission either remind Mr Fischler of his obligations and suggest that he close this political office, the only one of its kind in the EU, or instruct him to meet the costs and salaries for this office from the generous allowances paid to him for this purpose?If so, when?If not, why not?Does the Commission intend to urge Mr Fischler to reimburse the Ministry of Agriculture and the Industrial Association for these perks, to which he had no entitlement?If so, when will it request him to do so. When will Mr Fischler refund the money to the Ministry of Agriculture and the Industrial Association, and what is the sum involved?If not, why not?Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (13 September 1996)It is not true that Mr Fischler, Member of the Commission, maintains a political office in Vienna, as stated by the Honourable Member in his question.It is true, however, that the Austrian Federal Government has opened an office in Schenkengasse, on a decision taken by the cabinet on 4 April 1995 for the avowed purpose of making cooperation with Mr Fischler easier.Cooperation with the Member States is an important factor in the performance of the duties of Members of the Commission, and this does not run counter to their independence as required by Article 157(2) of the EC Treaty.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1775/96 by Erich SCHREINER to the Commission. Allegations that Mr Pirzio-Biroli claimed perks to which he was not entitled
Date: 1996-07-03
Institutions: European Parliament, SCHREINER
Subjects: Austria, EU control, allowances and expenses, lease, length of lease, privilege













EUR-Lex - 91996E1775 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1775

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1775/96 by Erich SCHREINER to the Commission. Allegations that Mr Pirzio-Biroli claimed perks to which he was not entitled  


Official Journal C 356 , 25/11/1996 P. 0094 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1775/96 by Erich Schreiner (NI) to the Commission (3 July 1996)Subject: Allegations that Mr Pirzio-Biroli claimed perks to which he was not entitledAccording to press reports (Täglich Alles of 16/17 April 1995) a residence rented by the Commission continued to be available, rent-free, to Mr Pirzio-Biroli, Commissioner Fischler's chef de cabinet, after he took up his duties in Brussels at the beginning of January 1995. He is also alleged to have used the EU Vienna Delegation's official car at no cost to himself.Are these reports true?How long did the EU residence in Vienna continue to be used, free of charge, by Mr Pirzio-Biroli and his family as a second residence?Is an official car with a chauffeur still made available to him, at no cost, when he visits Vienna? If so, why?Does the Commission intend to reclaim the accommodation and transport costs which continued, unjustifiably, to be paid on Mr Pirzio-Biroli's behalf after he was posted to Brussels?If so, when and what are the sums of money involved?If not, why not?Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (6 September 1996)Mr Pirzio-Biroli took up his duties as head of cabinet in January 1995. It is the policy of the Commission, on a change of head of delegation, to continue the lease of the residence in order to avoid costs incurred on the arrival of a successor, such as hotel accommodation, agency fees for a new lease (these are quite high in Austria, namely three months rent) and modifications especially as far as security equipment is concerned.In the case of Mr Pirzio-Biroli, it was intended to apply the same approach. However, as a result of the delay in appointing a successor, the Commission decided to give up the lease on the house and exercised the clause requiring three months notice. Mr Pirzio-Biroli's family continued to occupy the house until the period of three months notice had been completed.An official car is not available to Mr Pirzio-Biroli for private purposes.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1735/96 by Gijs de VRIES to the Commission. Suspension of the Lomé Agreement
Date: 1996-07-03
Institutions: DE VRIES, European Parliament
Subjects: Africa, Lomé Convention, civil war, development aid, financial cooperation, human rights, suspension of aid, technical cooperation













EUR-Lex - 91996E1735 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1735

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1735/96 by Gijs de VRIES to the Commission. Suspension of the Lomé Agreement  


Official Journal C 322 , 28/10/1996 P. 0101 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1735/96 by Gijs de Vries (ELDR) to the Commission (3 July 1996)Subject: Suspension of the Lomé AgreementIn reply to my question No. 670/96 ((OJ C 280, 25.9.1996, p. 60. )), the Commission mentions that financial and technical cooperation has been suspended, on human rights grounds, for Equatorial Guinea, Liberia, Rwanda, Togo, Uganda, Gambia, Niger, Nigeria, Sudan and Zaire.1. Is this the full list? If not, which other countries have been involved?2. When has each of these decisions to suspend development cooperation been taken by the Commission, and when has the Commission decided to lift the suspension?Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission (26 July 1996)The countries with which the Community has suspended fully or partially financial and technical cooperation for reasons including civil war and the violation of human rights are:>TABLE>
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1780/96 by Luigi FLORIO to the Commission. Suggested reduction in Community salaries
Date: 1996-07-03
Institutions: European Parliament, FLORIO
Subjects: European official, Finland, civil servant, living conditions, pay, wage determination, working conditions













EUR-Lex - 91996E1780 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1780

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1780/96 by Luigi FLORIO to the Commission. Suggested reduction in Community salaries  


Official Journal C 345 , 15/11/1996 P. 0105 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1780/96 by Luigi Florio (UPE) to the Commission (3 July 1996)Subject: Suggested reduction in Community salariesA few months ago the media reported that the head of the Finnish Government suggested to the President of the Commission, Mr Santer, that the pay of the staff of the Community institutions should be reduced in order to prevent a middle-ranking Finnish official from earning more than the Prime Minister.What response did this proposal receive?Does the Commission agree that the salaries paid - at all levels - in the Community institutions are excessively high?Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (29 July 1996)The Commission refers the Honourable Member to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom, ECSC) No 2963/95 of 18 December 1995 ((OJ L 310, 22.12.1995. )) regarding the remuneration of officials of the European Communities.The Commission feels that an objective comparison with the remuneration in national civil services can only be made on the basis of comparable living and working conditions, i.e. a comparison with national civil servants working abroad. It is not possible, therefore, for the Commission to comment on Community levels of remuneration, any more than on national levels.The Commission wishes to point out that the level of remuneration of Community officials was examined and finally determined during the 1991 negotiations on the method of adjustment of remuneration.The method was adopted by the Council in December 1991 and will be in operation for ten years. It is based on the principle that the remuneration of Community officials should keep pace with the average remuneration of national civil servants in the Member States, while also applying a measure of salary restraint.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1771/96 by Jesús CABEZÓN ALONSO to the Commission. Fraud affecting the agriculture budget
Date: 1996-07-03
Institutions: CABEZON ALONSO, European Parliament
Subjects: Community budget, EAGGF Guarantee Section, EU financing, budgetary control, budgetary expenditure, free service, use of aid













EUR-Lex - 91996E1771 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1771

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1771/96 by Jesús CABEZÓN ALONSO to the Commission. Fraud affecting the agriculture budget  


Official Journal C 365 , 04/12/1996 P. 0033 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1771/96 by Jesús Cabezón Alonso (PSE) to the Commission (3 July 1996)Subject: Fraud affecting the agriculture budgetAccording to the Commission 4700 cases of fraud against the Community budget were detected in 1995.10% of these cases accounted for 50% of the total amount of fraud.Half of all cases of fraud affected the agriculture budget.Can the Commission confirm these figures? In which countries did the cases of fraud in the agricultural sector occur? What kinds of fraud are most common?Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission (5 September 1996)The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its 1995 report on the fight against fraud ((COM(96) 173 final. )).The report indicates that in 1995, 4758 cases of irregularities involving 1146 MECU were detected. These figures include cases communicated by the Member States and inquiries conducted by the Commission with the Member States.2190 cases involving 411 MECU concerned the expenditure side of the budget. The other cases concerned the income side (traditional own resources).1853 cases involving 316 MECU concerned European agricultural guidance and guarantee fund (EAGGF) - guarantee expenditure.The Commission also confirms that a relatively small number of cases (less than 10% of the total) represent 574 MECU (50% of the total). These cases are the results of Commission inquiries conducted in 1995 with the Member States.The details of the breakdown by Member State in the area of EAGGF as well as the breakdown by the nature of the irregularity are contained in the Commission's report.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1736/96 by María SORNOSA MARTÍNEZ , Salvador JOVÉ PERES to the Commission. Conservation of red tuna stocks in the Mediterranean
Date: 1996-07-03
Institutions: European Parliament, JOVE PERES, SORNOSA MARTINEZ
Subjects: France, Mediterranean Sea, Spain, conservation of fish stocks, fisherman, fishery resources, fishing fleet, fishing net, fishing regulations













EUR-Lex - 91996E1736 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1736

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1736/96 by María SORNOSA MARTÍNEZ , Salvador JOVÉ PERES to the Commission. Conservation of red tuna stocks in the Mediterranean  


Official Journal C 385 , 19/12/1996 P. 0032 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1736/96 by María Sornosa Martínez (GUE/NGL) and Salvador Jové Peres (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (3 July 1996)Subject: Conservation of red tuna stocks in the MediterraneanA number of French seine fishing vessels are putting severe pressure on the red tuna stocks off the Valencian coast, even during the spawning season. Seine fishing is, in addition, of dubious efficiency, as the wounds inflicted lead to large numbers of discards.This points, essentially, to a conflict of powers which could be resolved by the forthcoming publication of a regulation on the conservation of fish stocks in the Mediterranean, in line with ICCAT recommendations.The activity of the French fishing vessels is endangering the activity of local fishermen along the Valencian coast, who use much more respectful techniques, and is even putting the survival of the species at risk.Does the Commission, accordingly, intend to place restrictions on seine fishing for red tuna in the Mediterranean?Answer given by Ms Bonino on behalf of the Commission (6 September 1996)The Commission is anxious to preserve the future of red tuna fishing in the Mediterranean and is therefore keen to see effective management of these fisheries. The priority, according to all scientific opinion, is to protect juveniles. Regulation (EC) No 1626/94 laying down certain technical measures for the conservation of fishery resources in the Mediterranean prohibits the landing and sale of undersized red tuna. ((OJ L 171, 6 July 1994. )) Furthermore, as indicated in its proposal for the fourth multiannual guidance programme, the Commission wants a very strict regulation of catch capacity and fishing efforts in the red tuna sector in order to relieve the pressure on stocks.The Commission believes that it is crucial that these measures be implemented in full. It does not, however, believe that purse seining, which is widely used in large-scale fisheries - in the tropics, for example - is itself to be blamed.