do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1880/96 by Glenys KINNOCK to the Commission. EU relations with Burma
Date: 1996-07-11
Institutions: European Parliament, KINNOCK
Subjects: ASEAN, EU control, EU relations, South-East Asia













EUR-Lex - 91996E1880 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1880

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1880/96 by Glenys KINNOCK to the Commission. EU relations with Burma  


Official Journal C 365 , 04/12/1996 P. 0049 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1880/96 by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission (11 July 1996)Subject: EU relations with BurmaWhat is the reaction of the EU to the inclusion of Burma in the ASEAN Regional Forum with which the EU will be meeting on 22 July? Will the EU delegation take this opportunity to renew the aborted 'critical dialogue' with the delegation from Burma? If not, by what other means does the EU intend to carry out a 'critical dialogue' with Burma?Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission (6 September 1996)The Association of South-East Asian Nations (Asean) has adopted a policy of 'constructive engagement' with Burma. With the prospect of a future ten-member Association comprising the seven current members plus Cambodia, Laos and Burma, all three future members have signed the treaty of friendship and cooperation in South-East Asia, which constitutes the first step towards future membership. The three countries, including Burma, which will be granted observer status at the forthcoming Asean ministerial meeting, have also been invited to attend the Association's regional forum (ARF), which deals with regional stability. As one of the dialogue partners in the ARF the Union has responded to this invitation on the general understanding that a 'critical dialogue' will take place on the fringes of the forum, which the Council Presidency conducted in a very clear manner at the ARF and PMC meetings in Jakarta on 23 and 24 July and on 25 July.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1890/96 by Christian ROVSING to the Commission. Long-distance coach tours
Date: 1996-07-11
Institutions: European Parliament, ROVSING
Subjects: Denmark, bus, carriage of passengers, common transport policy, competition law, means of public conveyance, road transport, transport company, transport lines, transport market













EUR-Lex - 91996E1890 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1890

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1890/96 by Christian ROVSING to the Commission. Long-distance coach tours  


Official Journal C 011 , 13/01/1997 P. 0024 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1890/96 by Christian Rovsing (PPE) to the Commission (11 July 1996)Subject: Long-distance coach toursDoes the Commission think it is in keeping with the EU's rules of competiion for Danish coach regulations to enable public monopoly companies such as DSB (Danish state railways) to prevent the passenger traffic council from allowing private bus companies to operate long distance in Denmark as has just happened when the passenger traffic council rejected an application from a number of express coach companies to provide a long-distance service in Denmark?Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission (7 October 1996)The Commission considers, as a matter of principle, that Community competition rules should be respected by all transport modes including public undertakings. However, certain undertakings entrusted with the operation of services of general economic interest may be granted special or exclusive rights under certain conditions established in Article 90 EC Treaty. Such restrictions on access to the market might be justified especially when authorities impose on these undertakings public service obligations which are compensated through public funding.Whether the Danish regulations and current practices concerning national regular bus services and railway systems are compatible with Community competition rules would have to be determined on a case by case basis. The Commission has so far not received information indicating a violation of these rules.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1906/96 by Erich SCHREINER to the Commission. Multiplicity of standards in the EU
Date: 1996-07-11
Institutions: European Parliament, SCHREINER
Subjects: European standard, award of contract, competition, economic integration, harmonisation of standards, invitation to tender, public contract, standard, technical standard













EUR-Lex - 91996E1906 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1906

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1906/96 by Erich SCHREINER to the Commission. Multiplicity of standards in the EU  


Official Journal C 365 , 04/12/1996 P. 0050 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1906/96 by Erich Schreiner (NI) to the Commission (11 July 1996)Subject: Multiplicity of standards in the EUThe large number of different standards in Europe places a heavy burden on European undertakings. Invitations to tender, in particular, are often based on national technical standards.1. What action is the Commission taking in this regard?2. How are we to assess the distortions of competition which arise from this multiplicity of standards?3. Will the Commission take steps to introduce Europe-wide harmonization of the various technical standards? If so, when can results be expected? If not, why not?Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (10 September 1996)The Commission agrees with the view of the Honourable Member that the co-existence of divergent standards seriously affects the quality of economic integration in the Community. Since 1983, the Commission has been actively promoting European standards. The European standardization bodies are also working towards this goal.Great progress has already been made, and the European standardization bodies (the European Committee for Standardization, the European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardization and the European Telecommunications Standards Institute) are currently producing more than 1000 standards per year, i.e. more than four standards per working day. The main activities of the national standardization bodies are now also focused on European and international standardization. Once transposed into the national systems, the European standards require the withdrawal of divergent national standards, thus effectively leading to harmonization.With regard to the drafting of new national standards, the procedures in Directive 83/189/EEC ((OJ L 109, 26.4.1983. )) enable interested parties to find out about, become involved in or request the drafting of a European standard instead of a national standard. The Commission regrets that interested parties do not make better use of the opportunities offered by the Directive.In the field of public procurement in particular, the Commission has launched a study into the extent to which contracting authorities actually refer to the European standards. It will certainly inform the Honourable Member of the results.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1872/96 by Salvador GARRIGA POLLEDO to the Commission. The Atlanta Olympics
Date: 1996-07-11
Institutions: European Parliament, GARRIGA POLLEDO
Subjects: Community budget, EU financing, Olympic games, United States, disabled person, humanitarian aid













EUR-Lex - 91996E1872 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1872

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1872/96 by Salvador GARRIGA POLLEDO to the Commission. The Atlanta Olympics  


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





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1872/96 by Salvador Garriga Polledo (PPE) to the Commission (11 July 1996)Subject: The Atlanta OlympicsCan the Commission state the exact amount of the EU's contribution from the Community budget to the Olympic Games in Atlanta?Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (24 September 1996)No direct support from the Community budget was granted to the Olympic games in Atlanta.On the other hand the Commission (European Community humanitarian office) has undertaken to commit 3.9 mecu to Atlanta Olympic aid 1996, the humanitarian programme connected with the Atlanta Olympic games.With regard to the paralympic games, the Olympic games for people with disabilities, the Commission is making a financial contribution of 350 000 ECU to the teams from the Member States, about 1 200 athletes.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1892/96 by Anita POLLACK to the Commission. Childcare
Date: 1996-07-11
Institutions: European Parliament, POLLACK
Subjects: Council of the European Union, EC recommendation, European Commission, child, child care, exchange of information, family policy, gender equality, report













EUR-Lex - 91996E1892 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1892

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1892/96 by Anita POLLACK to the Commission. Childcare  


Official Journal C 322 , 28/10/1996 P. 0108 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1892/96 by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission (11 July 1996)Subject: ChildcareThe Commission should now have the results of the review of the Recommendation on childcare.When will it release the figures to the European Parliament, to show whether there has been any improvement in provision since the Recommendation was agreed by Council?What further action is the Commission proposing to take?Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (30 July 1996)In March 1995, the Commission forwarded to all Member States a questionnaire requesting details of the measures they had taken to implement the 1992 Council Recommendation 92/241/EEC on childcare ((OJ L 123, 8. 5.1992. )). Most of the Member States have replied to this questionnaire. This information will allow the Commission to present a draft report before the end of this year.The Commission is committed to the continuation of work and research in the area of reconciliation of work and family life. Indeed, it is a key priority of the Community fourth action programme on equal opportunities for women and men (1996-2000) ((OJ L 335, 30.12.1995. )). The report will make a valuable contribution to the Commission's consideration of the most important aspects of childcare services upon which to focus future action.In the meantime, it should be noted that the Community childcare network has recently published a 'Review of services for young children in the European Union 1990-1995' which gives a comparative analysis of the current provisions in each Member State.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1894/96 by Anita POLLACK to the Commission. Urban Barometer
Date: 1996-07-11
Institutions: European Parliament, POLLACK
Subjects: data collection, invitation to tender, living conditions, quality of life, regional development, social analysis, social indicator, standard of living, town, urban area













EUR-Lex - 91996E1894 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1894

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1894/96 by Anita POLLACK to the Commission. Urban Barometer  


Official Journal C 385 , 19/12/1996 P. 0058 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1894/96 by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission (11 July 1996)Subject: Urban BarometerIn its Guide to Innovative Actions for Regional Development the Commission mentioned an idea for setting up an 'Urban barometer' to find ways of measuring the quality of life in cities and expressing it in an index of particularly significant indicators.Has this progressed past the idea stage? What is the current state of play?Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (5 September 1996)The Commission attaches great importance to information about the socio-economic and environmental situation in cities, both to assess the impact of present policies and to enable effective monitoring of the quality of life in urban areas. The 'urban barometer' to which the Honourable Member refers is one of the ideas in this respect, for which it is necessary to collect and analyse a number of data related to the various aspects of living conditions in our cities.In this respect, the Commission has defined a work programme on urban indicators which will be the subject of a call for tender. This work programme concerns a pilot phase that will be implemented in a considerable number of European cities. The call for tenders is expected to be published in the Official Journal early in the autumn of 1996.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1910/96 by Anita POLLACK to the Commission. Directive 92/43/EEC (habitats)
Date: 1996-07-11
Institutions: European Parliament, POLLACK
Subjects: Council of the European Union, EC Directive, application of EU law, environmental protection, protection of animal life, protection of plant life













EUR-Lex - 91996E1910 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1910

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1910/96 by Anita POLLACK to the Commission. Directive 92/43/EEC (habitats)  


Official Journal C 385 , 19/12/1996 P. 0062 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1910/96 by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission (11 July 1996)Subject: Directive 92/43/EEC (habitats)Which Member States have not yet fully transposed Directive 92/43/EEC ((OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7. )) into national law?Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (19 September 1996)Four Member States (Germany, Greece, Italy, Portugal) have not communicated any national implementation measures in respect of the Directive.The other Member States have communicated national implementation measures, but in some cases the transposing legislation is incomplete in its contents or in its geographical scope.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1882/96 by David HALLAM to the Commission. Tattoos and the single market
Date: 1996-07-11
Institutions: European Parliament, HALLAM
Subjects: approximation of laws, chemical product, free movement of goods, harmonisation of standards, popular art, standard, trade restriction













EUR-Lex - 91996E1882 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1882

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1882/96 by David HALLAM to the Commission. Tattoos and the single market  


Official Journal C 385 , 19/12/1996 P. 0054 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1882/96 by David Hallam (PSE) to the Commission (11 July 1996)Subject: Tattoos and the single marketIs the Commission aware that regulations concerning the use of pigments for tattoos are not harmonized across the Union? This leads to barriers between Member States applying different standards. Are there any plans for such harmonization? If so, when?Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (7 October 1996)The Commission is aware that regulations concerning the use of pigments for tattoos are not harmonized across the Union. It would remind the Honourable Member that, in the absence of Union-wide harmonization, Member States are free to adopt or maintain in force national regulations provided that these comply with the rules set out in the EC Treaty. The divergent national standards referred to by the Honourable Member are, therefore, in themselves not in breach of Community law, but they must not lead to compartmentalization of the internal market. For instance, national regulations which had the effect of impeding the movement of goods within the internal market would, in order to comply with the relevant provisions of the Treaty, have to be justified by one of the objectives spelt out in Article 36 of the EC Treaty, such as the protection of health, and would have to be proportionate to that objective.The Commission would ask the Honourable Member to provide it with any useful information which sheds light on the barriers in question and which has not yet been brought to its attention. It will then take the appropriate action.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1893/96 by Anita POLLACK to the Commission. Homeworking
Date: 1996-07-11
Institutions: European Parliament, POLLACK
Subjects: EC recommendation, European Commission, European social policy, International Labour Organisation, action programme, female worker, home working, labour law, working conditions













EUR-Lex - 91996E1893 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1893

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1893/96 by Anita POLLACK to the Commission. Homeworking  


Official Journal C 365 , 04/12/1996 P. 0049 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1893/96 by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission (11 July 1996)Subject: HomeworkingGiven the large number of exploited homeworkers, mainly women, why has the Commission backed down on its written undertaking to bring forward a recommendation on homeworking?Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (24 September 1996)The Commission has fully recognised the need to strive at European level to improve the working conditions of the large number of homeworkers by including homeworking in the priorities for social policy in the Commission's medium term social action programme (1995/1997) ((COM(95) 134. )).The Commission recommendation which was announced in this action programme had to be postponed to await the completion of International labour organisation (ILO) activities in this field. In the light of the outcome of the ILO conference of last June at which an international convention and a recommendation on homeworking were adopted, the Commission will re-examine its approach to take into account those recent developments.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1897/96 by Jaak VANDEMEULEBROUCKE to the Commission. Use of languages and language requirements
Date: 1996-07-11
Institutions: European Parliament, VANDEMEULEBROUCKE
Subjects: EU Official Journal, application of EU law, competition (EU), recruitment, regulations for civil servants













EUR-Lex - 91996E1897 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1897

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1897/96 by Jaak VANDEMEULEBROUCKE to the Commission. Use of languages and language requirements  


Official Journal C 365 , 04/12/1996 P. 0050 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1897/96 by Jaak Vandemeulebroucke (ARE) to the Commission (11 July 1996)Subject: Use of languages and language requirementsThe Commission will be aware that I take an interest in the use of all the official languages and especially of Dutch. Despite my various questions and comments and despite the many assurances given by the Commission, I continue to detect numerous breaches of its own rules. In the English-language Notice of Vacancy COM/R/A/180, for example, the address to which applications are to be submitted is given only in French; in OJ C 151 A applicants are required to have a very good command of English and French.What sanctions are imposed for these breaches of Community law? If the Commission does not consider imposing sanctions, how does it account for the fact that its own instructions (as explained on several occasions in answers to parliamentary questions) are being so blatantly ignored?Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (13 September 1996)The Commission acknowledges that by mistake its address appears in French only in the English version of the notice of selection COM/R/A/180. It agrees that this mistake is regrettable, but does not feel that it is an infringement of Community law.With regard to the notice of competition mentioned by the Honourable Member, the Commission would draw attention to the fact that Article 28(f) of the Staff Regulations imposes a general condition of eligibility that the candidate must have 'a thorough knowledge of one of the languages of the Communities and a satisfactory knowledge of another language of the Communities to the extent necessary for the performance of his duties'. Since that article imposes only a minumum requirement, there is nothing to prevent stricter conditions from being laid down in the notice of competition in line with the specific requirements of the posts or category of posts which candidates are expected to fill.
Administrative arrangements on trade in textile products between the European Community and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan - Agreed Minute
Date: 1996-07-11
Institutions: European Community, Pakistan
Subjects: Pakistan, Uruguay Round, administrative cooperation, textile product, trade agreement, trade agreement (EU)













EUR-Lex - 21996A0711(08) - EN






Avis juridique important




|



21996A0711(08)

Administrative arrangements on trade in textile products between the European Community and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan - Agreed Minute  


Official Journal L 173 , 11/07/1996 P. 0032 - 0033 





ADMINISTRATIVE ARRANGEMENTS on trade in textile products between the European Community and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan AGREED MINUTE During consultations held between delegations from the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and the European Community, the two parties agreed that the provisions of their bilateral Agreement on trade in textile products, initialled on 12 September 1986, as last notified by the Exchange of Letters initialled on 22 December 1994, listed in the Annex to this Agreed Minute, shall continue to govern their trade relations in the textile sector.As a consequence, these provisions shall be notified to the Textiles Monitoring Body (TMB) as constituting the basis of their administrative arrangements within the meaning of Article 2 (17) of the Uruguay Round Agreement on Textiles and Clothing.For the Islamic Republic of PakistanFor the European CommunityProvisions of the Agreement between the European Community and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan on trade in textile products initialled on 12 September 1986, as amended by the Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters amending the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan on trade in textile products, initialled in Brussels, on 12 December 1992, which will be notified as administrative arrangements under Article 2 (17) of the Uruguay Round Textiles Agreement >TABLE>
Administrative arrangements on trade in textile products between the European Community and the Republic of Indonesia - Agreed Minute
Date: 1996-07-11
Institutions: European Community, Indonesia
Subjects: Indonesia, Uruguay Round, administrative cooperation, textile product, trade agreement, trade agreement (EU)













EUR-Lex - 21996A0711(05) - EN






Avis juridique important




|



21996A0711(05)

Administrative arrangements on trade in textile products between the European Community and the Republic of Indonesia - Agreed Minute  


Official Journal L 173 , 11/07/1996 P. 0024 - 0025 





ADMINISTRATIVE ARRANGEMENTS on trade in textile products between the European Community and the Republic of Indonesia AGREED MINUTE During consultations held between delegations from the Republic of Indonesia and the Commission of the European Communities, the two parties agreed that the provisions of their bilateral Agreement on trade in textile products, initialled on 28 June 1986, as last modified by the Exchange of Letters initialled on 13 January 1995, listed in the Annex to this Agreed Minute, shall continue to govern their trade relations in the textile sector.As a consequence, these provisions shall be notified to the Textiles Monitoring Body (TMB) as constituting the basis of their administrative arrangements within the meaning of Article 2 (17) of the Uruguay Round Agreement on Textiles and Clothing.For the Government of the Republic of IndonesiaFor the European CommunityANNEX Provisions of the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Indonesia on trade in textile products, initialled in Brussels on 28 June 1986, as amended by the Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters amending the Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Indonesia on trade in textile products, initialled in Brussels on 27 November 1992, which will be notified as administrative arrangements under Article 2 (17) of the Uruguay Round Textiles Agreement >TABLE>