do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1811/96 by Nikitas KAKLAMANIS to the Commission. EUROPALIA 1997
Date: 1996-07-05
Institutions: European Parliament, KAKLAMANIS
Subjects: Austria, EU financing, Mexico, Portugal, cultural event, cultural heritage, cultural organisation, cultural policy, cultural transmission













EUR-Lex - 91996E1811 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1811

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1811/96 by Nikitas KAKLAMANIS to the Commission. EUROPALIA 1997  


Official Journal C 365 , 04/12/1996 P. 0037 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1811/96 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission (5 July 1996)Subject: EUROPALIA 1997Will the Commission say: Is the European Union contributing in any way whatsoever to organizing the Europalia-Turkey 1997? Has any provision been made for Community funding? If so, does the Commission intend to ensure that historical truth is respected, particularly as regards the genocide of the Armenians, a matter on which the European Parliament has adopted a resolution?Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (13 September 1996)Since the Belgian foundation 'Europalia' was set up, the Commission has provided financial support for a variety of its activities aimed at increasing familiarity with the culture of countries such as Mexico, Portugal and Austria.The foundation bears the sole responsibility for decisions relating to the choice of country and artistic and cultural programming.The 'Europalia-Turkey' festival has been cancelled.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1871/96 by Michl EBNER to the Commission. Compulsory vaccination in Italy
Date: 1996-07-05
Institutions: EBNER, European Parliament
Subjects: EU national, Italy, administrative sanction, approximation of laws, child, competence of the Member States, health policy, immigration, vaccination













EUR-Lex - 91996E1871 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1871

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1871/96 by Michl EBNER to the Commission. Compulsory vaccination in Italy  


Official Journal C 322 , 28/10/1996 P. 0107 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1871/96 by Michl Ebner (PPE) to the Commission (5 July 1996)Subject: Compulsory vaccination in ItalyVaccination against polio, diphtheria, tetanus and hepatitis B is compulsory is Italy and, where this requirement is not met, heavy fines are imposed (up to 1 500 000 lire per case and per parent), children are not permitted to attend school or to take state examinations, access to social institutions (crèches, children's homes, kindergartens, youth groups) is denied and admission to sports clubs is impossible. The Commission is invited to consider whether this is compatible with the right of free establishment, which is ensured in the EU, seeing that this right is invalidated in Italy by a state law making vaccination compulsory.In South Tyrol there are currently four cases of children being excluded from school and one of a child denied access to a kindergarten because they do not have vaccination certificates. They are all children of immigrants from Germany and Austria, where vaccination is not compulsory.Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (2 August 1996)The Commission is aware of the differences in legal provisions in the Member States concerning compulsory vaccination. These differences in requirements also exist as regards vaccinations which are merely recommended.Responsibility for vaccination timetables and the legal obligations arising from these lies with the Member States, as long as these provisions apply to all residents without any discrimination against nationals of other Member States.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1808/96 by Mihail PAPAYANNAKIS to the Commission. Disposal of used catalytic converters
Date: 1996-07-05
Institutions: European Parliament, PAPAYANNAKIS
Subjects: Greece, dangerous substance, environmental protection, proposal (EU), public health, vehicle parts, waste disposal, waste management













EUR-Lex - 91996E1808 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1808

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1808/96 by Mihail PAPAYANNAKIS to the Commission. Disposal of used catalytic converters  


Official Journal C 385 , 19/12/1996 P. 0041 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1808/96 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (5 July 1996)Subject: Disposal of used catalytic convertersSince 1995 67 000 catalytic converters for motor vehicles should have been replaced in Greece, but only 10 000 have actually been replaced. Of this number, 1500 have been sent for recycling abroad via official dealers and the rest are either being kept in the garages which replaced them or being sold, according the newspaper 'To Vima', as scrap metal.Given that:a) Catalytic convertors contain substances which pose a public health hazard;b) There is no institutional or legislative framework in Greece governing the monitoring, the replacement or the disposal of convertors; andc) The disposal of these convertors in Greece may be described as dangerous;Will the Commission say:1. What measures have been taken at European level to deal with the problem of used convertors?2. How does it intend to address this problem as part of its policy for the protection of the environment, consumers and public health?Answer given Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (4 October 1996)In line with the Commission's work programme for 1996 ((COM(95) 512 final. )) a proposal is being prepared on end of life vehicles which aims to ensure that the management of end of life vehicles, including their components (therefore also catalysts removed from end of life vehicles) does not represent a hazard for the environment and human health. Since the preparatory work in relation to this proposal has not been completed, the Commission is not in a position to provide the Honourable Member with more information on the subject.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1836/96 by James PROVAN to the Commission. Convergence between WTO and EU trade law
Date: 1996-07-05
Institutions: European Parliament, PROVAN
Subjects: GATT, case-law (EU), conservation of resources, natural resources, renewable resources













EUR-Lex - 91996E1836 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1836

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1836/96 by James PROVAN to the Commission. Convergence between WTO and EU trade law  


Official Journal C 322 , 28/10/1996 P. 0104 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1836/96 by James Provan (PPE) to the Commission (5 July 1996)Subject: Convergence between WTO and EU trade lawIn the light of the WTO ruling that, while a trade measure does not have to be necessary or essential to the conservation of an exhaustible natural resource, it has to be 'primarily aimed at' such conservation, as most recently upheld in the US-Venezuela Gasoline case, could the Commission state whether such a legal rule exists in the jurisprudence of the EU, and if not, is there any such equivalent rule?Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (23 July 1996)Although there is a certain parallellism between the general exceptions to the General agreement on tariffs and trade as laid down in Article XX of that agreement and the exceptions mentioned in Article 36 of the EC Treaty, there is no direct equivalent in Article 36 for the exception for 'measures relating to the conservation of exhaustible natural resources...' of Article XX (g) of GATT. In addition to the exceptions of Article 36, the Court of justice, beginning with its judgement in case 120/78 (Cassis de Dijon) ((1979 ECR, p. 649. )) has developed a doctrine, according to which Member States in specific circumstances may take measures on the basis of 'mandatory requirements' relating inter alia to the protection of the environment. Such exceptions for 'mandatory requirements' for the protection of the environment probably come closest to the exception of Article XX(g) of GATT.In general, however, one should be extremely circumspect in drawing parallels between the exceptions to the EC Treaty, whether contained in the treaty or derived from case law of the Court of justice, and the exceptions to the GATT. The exceptions are different in scope. Article 36 relates only to the prohibition of quantitive restrictions and measures of equivalent effect, whereas Article XX relates to the GATT as a whole. The context - a customs union and single market treaty as against a general trade agreement - is wholly different, and obviously the case law of the Court of justice is much more developed than the relatively few rulings and recommendations by GATT panels and the one decision of the appellate body thus far. Moreover, it was certainly not the intention of the negotiatiors of the Marrakesh agreement to create some world-wide internal market by one stroke of the pen. The matter raised in the question for the moment is better left primarily to academic research.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1840/96 by Sir Jack STEWART-CLARK to the Commission. Observatory on Older People
Date: 1996-07-05
Institutions: European Parliament, STEWART-CLARK
Subjects: EU aid, European Union, European social policy, demographic analysis, elderly person, population ageing, report, socioeconomic conditions













EUR-Lex - 91996E1840 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1840

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1840/96 by Sir Jack STEWART-CLARK to the Commission. Observatory on Older People  


Official Journal C 345 , 15/11/1996 P. 0110 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1840/96 by Sir Jack Stewart-Clark (PPE) to the Commission (5 July 1996)Subject: Observatory on Older PeopleWhat steps does the Commission plan to take to act on the conclusions of its report 'the Demographic Situation in the European Union 1995'? Does the Commission have any plans to re-establish the Observatory on Older People? and if so, when?Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (31 July 1996)The report on the demographic situation in the European Union 1995' has developed the theme of ageing, with a comparative analysis of national structures as its main approach.The Commission will continue the work in this field in particular through supplementary analysis at regional level.The conclusion of the Social Affairs Council of 3 June 1996, requests the Commission to work more closely with national bodies and to define jointly a new set of priorities.In this context the opinion of the Parliament on the 1995 demographic report will be very useful.The re-establishment of an observatory with the aim of drawing up regular comparative reports on the socio-economic situation of older people throughout the Community is envisaged in the proposal for a Council decision on Community support for actions in favour of older people adopted by the Commission on 1 March 1995 ((OJ C 115, 9.5.1995. )).The proposal has still not been adopted by the Council. In this context, the Commission has not seen fit to re-establish the observatory. This situation is being kept under review.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1842/96 by David BOWE to the Commission. Demeton-S.Methyl
Date: 1996-07-05
Institutions: BOWE, European Parliament
Subjects: United States, exchange of information, health risk, pesticide, public health, toxic substance













EUR-Lex - 91996E1842 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1842

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1842/96 by David BOWE to the Commission. Demeton-S.Methyl  


Official Journal C 091 , 20/03/1997 P. 0002 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1842/96 by David Bowe (PSE) to the Commission (5 July 1996)Subject: Demeton-S.MethylIs the Commission aware of the harmful effects of the chemical Demeton-S.Methyl used as a pesticide in crop sprays?Because of the danger posed to public health this pesticide has been banned in the United States of America. Will the Commission propose limitations on the use of Demeton-S.Methyl to avoid the airborne drift of this dangerous substance?Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (17 September 1996)The Commission is making contact with the United States authorities in order to collect the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1809/96 by Nikitas KAKLAMANIS to the Commission. Problems faced by road hauliers in transit through Austria
Date: 1996-07-05
Institutions: European Parliament, KAKLAMANIS
Subjects: Austria, application of EU law, road transport, roadworthiness tests, transit













EUR-Lex - 91996E1809 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1809

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1809/96 by Nikitas KAKLAMANIS to the Commission. Problems faced by road hauliers in transit through Austria  


Official Journal C 385 , 19/12/1996 P. 0042 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1809/96 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission (5 July 1996)Subject: Problems faced by road hauliers in transit through AustriaAccording to the Greek periodical, 'Trochoi Kai Tir', allegations have been made that the Austrian authorities have forced many international road hauliers to drive their vehicles to poorly equipped and unauthorized garages to repair non-existent technical problems which the police have found (or have tried to find). The whole procedure is enormously expensive and time-consuming for the transport companies concerned.Will the Commission say whether it is aware of this matter, and what immediate measures it intends to take to put an end to this curious practice by the Austrian authorities?Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission (20 September 1996)All Member States are required by Community legislation to carry out regular roadworthiness tests for vehicles registered on their territory and are also fully entitled to check the roadworthiness of vehicles of any nationality driving on their territory, provided that such checks are not done in a discriminatory manner. Equally, should such controls reveal serious vehicle defects, the authorities are fully entitled, for safety or for environmental reasons, to require that the vehicle visit the nearest garage for the necessary repairs before continuing its journey.The Commission is not aware of any particular difficulties being faced by foreign trucks on Austrian territory.If the Commission receives detailed complaints highlighting specific examples of alleged police harassment or discriminatory treatment of foreign trucks in Austria or any other Member State it will investigate and act accordingly.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1865/96 by Spalato BELLERE' to the Commission. Judgment against the firm Ambrosio of San Giuseppe Vesuviano, Naples, which exports cubes of candied melon
Date: 1996-07-05
Institutions: BELLERE, European Parliament
Subjects: EU law - national law, France, Italy, case-law (EU), free movement of goods, fruit vegetable, health certificate, health control, restriction on competition













EUR-Lex - 91996E1865 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1865

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1865/96 by Spalato BELLERE' to the Commission. Judgment against the firm Ambrosio of San Giuseppe Vesuviano, Naples, which exports cubes of candied melon  


Official Journal C 365 , 04/12/1996 P. 0047 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1865/96 by Spalato Belleré (NI) to the Commission (5 July 1996)Subject: Judgment against the firm Ambrosio of San Giuseppe Vesuviano, Naples, which exports cubes of candied melonOn 4 June this year the French firm Union-Ciprial of Apt successfully brought a case at the court of first instance in Avignon against the firm Ambrosio srl of San Giuseppe Vesuviano, Naples, and the French importer of the cubes of melon produced in three colours by that firm, on the grounds that the product contained excessive quantities of beta sisterol, a substance which is also found in turnips. The court in Avignon and hence the Public Prosecutor did not take due account of the veracity of the health documentation issued by the Italian local health authorities, assuming the latter to be corrupt and controlled by the Mafia. Nor did they take due account of the marketing certificates issued for the product and the licence for its sale. Does the Commission not consider that this judgment showing discrimination against official documents issued in a Member State constitutes a violation of correct administrative relations within the European Union and hence creates a serious restriction on freedom of competition and the free movement of goods within the European Community?Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (6 September 1996)The Commission does not possess sufficient information on the case described by the Honourable Member for it to take a decision as to whether the principle of free movement of goods has been breached.Without wishing to prejudge the existence of a violation of that principle in the case at issue, the Commission would stress that, in accordance with the case-law of the Court of Justice, Articles 30 et seq. of the EC Treaty have a direct effect and may be relied on by individuals before national courts in Member States.In addition to the means of redress available under national law, individuals who consider that their interests have been harmed by a state measure that conflicts with Community law may lodge a complaint with the Commission, making available the factual and legal particulars in their possession.If particulars were brought to its attention that indicated the existence of a violation of Community law, the Commission would be certain to take the necessary steps.
Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 40/96 of 5 July 1996 amending Annex I (Veterinary and phytosanitary matters) to the EEA Agreement
Date: 1996-07-05
Institutions: EEA Joint Committee
Subjects: European Economic Area, agreement (EU), animal nutrition, labelling, marketing, protein products








L_1996291EN.01003701.xml










14.11.1996   


EN


Official Journal of the European Communities


L 291/37





DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE
No 40/96
of 5 July 1996
amending Annex I (Veterinary and phytosanitary matters) to the EEA Agreement
THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,
Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, as adjusted by the Protocol Adjusting the Agreement on the European Economic Area, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Agreement’, and in particular Article 98 thereof,
Whereas Annex I to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 32/96 of 5 June 1996 (1),
Whereas Commission Directive 95/33/EC of 10 July 1995 amending Council Directive 82/471/EEC concerning certain products used in animal nutrition (2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
The following indent shall be added in point 9 (Council Directive 82/471/EEC) in Chapter II of Annex I to the Agreement:






‘—



395 L 0033: Commission Directive 95/33/EC of 10 July 1995 (OJ No L 167, 18. 7. 1995, p. 17).’




Article 2
The texts of Directive 95/33/EC in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, which are annexed to the respective language versions of this Decision, are authentic.
Article 3
This Decision shall enter into force on 1 September 1996, provided that all the notifications pursuant to Article 103(1) of the Agreement have been made to the EEA Joint Committee.
Article 4
This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Communities.

Done at Brussels, 5 July 1996.


For the EEA Joint Committee


The President

P. Benavides




(1)  OJ No L 237, 19. 9. 1996, p. 43.

(2)  OJ No L 167, 18. 7. 1995, p. 17.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1300/96 of 5 July 1996 amending Regulation (EC) No 1098/94 laying down the regional base areas applicable under the arable support system for producers
Date: 1996-07-05
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Portugal, cereals, leguminous vegetable, oleaginous plant, regional aid, utilised agricultural area













EUR-Lex - 31996R1300 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



31996R1300

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1300/96 of 5 July 1996 amending Regulation (EC) No 1098/94 laying down the regional base areas applicable under the arable support system for producers  


Official Journal L 167 , 06/07/1996 P. 0003 - 0004 





COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1300/96 of 5 July 1996 amending Regulation (EC) No 1098/94 laying down the regional base areas applicable under the arable support system for producersTHE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1765/92 of 30 June 1992 establishing a support system for producers of certain arable crops (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2989/95 (2), and in particular Article 12 thereof,Whereas Commission Regulation (EC) No 1098/94 (3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2391/95 (4), lays down the regional base areas applicable under the support system for producers of certain arable crops;Whereas, following an application from Portugal new base areas should be fixed in accordance with their regionalization plan, without thereby altering the relevant total base area;Whereas it is therefore necessary to amend Regulation (EC) No 1098/94;Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Joint Management Committee for Cereals, Oils and Fats and Dried Fodder,HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:Article 1 In the Annex to Regulation (EC) No 1098/94 the figures relating to the regions indicated in the sector headed 'Portugal` shall be replaced by the figures in the Annex to this Regulation.Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on the seventh day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.Done at Brussels, 5 July 1996.For the CommissionFranz FISCHLERMember of the Commission(1) OJ No L 181, 1. 7. 1992, p. 12.(2) OJ No L 312, 23. 12. 1995, p. 5.(3) OJ No L 121, 12. 5. 1994, p. 12.(4) OJ No L 244, 12. 10. 1995, p. 61.ANNEX >TABLE>
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1825/96 by Hugh McMAHON to the Commission. Situation of the starch industry and its industrial customers in the EU
Date: 1996-07-05
Institutions: European Parliament, MCMAHON
Subjects: export refund, maize, processing industry, production refund, security of supply, starch, world market price













EUR-Lex - 91996E1825 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1825

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1825/96 by Hugh McMAHON to the Commission. Situation of the starch industry and its industrial customers in the EU  


Official Journal C 365 , 04/12/1996 P. 0040 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1825/96 by Hugh McMahon (PSE) to the Commission (5 July 1996)Subject: Situation of the starch industry and its industrial customers in the EUIs the Commission aware that the future employment prospects of some 15 000 people within the EU are facing difficulties due to problems in the supply of maize, and due to the failure of the current levels of export refunds to enable European industries using starch to purchase supplies at prices comparable to those of their non-European competitors?What measures does the Commission intend to take to tackle these twin problems for industrial users of starch?Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (31 July 1996)The Commission acknowledges that the supply of maize to the Community processing industry has been affected by the reduced supplies available after the last harvest. This phenomenon is not confined to Community territory since it is also apparent on the world market, but it has not seriously undermined the activity of the starch industry.Given this situation, which has led to a much higher price level both on the world market and on the Community market, the Commission has continued its policy of refunds for starch and starch products, the bulk of which are produced from maize. No refund was granted, however, for maize in the unaltered state during the last marketing year. Until 12 April this year the maize-based industry had always qualified for production refunds, but from that date the market statistics no longer justified a refund. Apart from a period of five weeks starting on 24 May, the export refunds have been maintained.The Commission intends to continue its policy of fixing refunds for starch and its by-products while a significant price difference remains between the Community market and the world market.