do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2204/96 by Gerardo FERNÁNDEZ-ALBOR to the Commission. Circulation of the euro in Le Havre, France
Date: 1996-08-02
Institutions: European Parliament, FERNANDEZ ALBOR
Subjects: Economic and Monetary Union, European Monetary System, Nord-Pas-de-Calais, public awareness campaign, single monetary policy, testing













EUR-Lex - 91996E2204 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2204

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2204/96 by Gerardo FERNÁNDEZ-ALBOR to the Commission. Circulation of the euro in Le Havre, France  


Official Journal C 060 , 26/02/1997 P. 0133 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2204/96 by Susan Waddington (PSE) to the Commission (2 August 1996)Subject: Circulation of the euro in Le Havre, FranceIn a recent experiment, the European Union's single currency, the euro, was placed in circulation in Le Havre, France, for a period of two weeks, according to sources in the French Ministry for Economic and Budgetary Affairs.The aim of the experiment, which was essentially pedagogical in nature, was to increase public awareness of monetary union.Given the interesting and original nature of the experiment, can the Commission say whether it has received detailed information on the results and whether, in the light of what was done, it considers that this experiment should be extended to other Community towns and areas as a way of raising public awareness about the monetary union which is soon to be introduced in the EU?Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission (26 September 1996)The Commission was indeed aware of the experiment of placing euro coins in circulation in Le Havre between 25 June and 9 July 1996.This experiment was carried out on the initiative of Le Havre town hall and the Le Havre Coin Collectors Club with a view to increasing public awareness of the future European currency.The Commission welcomes spontaneous initiatives of this nature, which are becoming increasingly common in Member States ahead of the introduction of the euro.It is closely following these interesting and encouraging experiments, which provide information for the European public and raise its awareness of developments.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2150/96 by Richard HOWITT to the Commission. Code of Practice on the employment of disabled persons
Date: 1996-08-02
Institutions: European Parliament, HOWITT
Subjects: EU publication, European social policy, designated employment, disabled person, equal treatment, job access, labour code, worker with disabilities













EUR-Lex - 91996E2150 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2150

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2150/96 by Richard HOWITT to the Commission. Code of Practice on the employment of disabled persons  


Official Journal C 345 , 15/11/1996 P. 0116 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2150/96 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (3 August 1996)Subject: Code of Practice on the employment of disabled personsWhat progress is being made in agreeing the Code of Practice, to ensure equal opportunities in the employment within the European institutions for people with disabilities? What separate action is being taken in this respect by both DGIX and DGV? How is the European Parliament involved in the drawing up of the draft Code? What is the timetable for its expected agreement?Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (16 September 1996)A draft of a code of good practice on the employment of disabled people within the Commission and other institutions has been circulated to directorates general and staff representatives for their comments. It will subsequently be discussed with the other institutions before being adopted by the Commission. As announced in the Communication of the Commission on equality of opportunity for people with disabilities ((COM(96) 406. )), it is intended to adopt the code by the end of 1996.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2155/96 by Thomas MEGAHY to the Commission. Evasion of tobacco advertising rules
Date: 1996-08-02
Institutions: European Parliament, MEGAHY
Subjects: advertising, approximation of laws, consumer information, display, health risk, proposal (EU), sporting event, tobacco













EUR-Lex - 91996E2155 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2155

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2155/96 by Thomas MEGAHY to the Commission. Evasion of tobacco advertising rules  


Official Journal C 060 , 26/02/1997 P. 0127 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2155/96 by Susan Waddington (PSE) to the Commission (2 August 1996)Subject: Evasion of tobacco advertising rulesLarge billboard advertisements have recently appeared in Belgium promoting an international kite festival to be held at Knokke during the summer. Although these purport to advertise a sporting event, around a fifth of the poster is taken up by the words Peter Stuyvesant. Despite this, the poster carries no health warning.Will the Commission take or propose action to stop this blatant evasion of the rules governing advertising?Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (6 September 1996)There is no existing Community legislation imposing a health warning on tobacco posters, although a Council Directive imposes the use of health warnings on tobacco packaging ((Council Directive 89/622/EEC, as amended by Directive 92/41/EEC, OJ L 359, 8.12.1989 and OJ L 158, 11.6.1992. )). An amended Commission proposal for a Council Directive on the approximation of the Member States' laws, regulations and administrative provisions on advertising of tobacco products ((OJ C 129, 21.5.1992. )), envisages a complete ban on the outdoor advertisements described by the Honourable Member.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2191/96 by Armelle GUINEBERTIERE to the Commission. Problems in the agricultural sector
Date: 1996-08-02
Institutions: European Parliament, GUINEBERTIERE
Subjects: agricultural product, apiculture, foodstuffs legislation, honey, industrial product, labelling, originating product, proposal (EU)













EUR-Lex - 91996E2191 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2191

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2191/96 by Armelle GUINEBERTIERE to the Commission. Problems in the agricultural sector  


Official Journal C 365 , 04/12/1996 P. 0090 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2191/96 by Armelle Guinebertière (UPE) to the Commission (2 August 1996)Subject: Problems in the agricultural sectorDirective 74/409/EEC ((OJ L 221, 12.8.1974, p. 10. )) is currently being amended. It concerns the management of the honey sector.1. Socially and legally, beekeepers are farmers but their activities are the responsibility of DG III, the Directorate-General for industry.However, honey is the one unprocessed agricultural product which is not regarded as an industrial product.Would it not be more sensible to give DG VI responsibility for beekeepers' activities?2. Since honey is a product of the land, the designation of its origin should be authorized. Consumers want an indication on the label showing that honey has been imported into the European Union to be made obligatory and this information would make commercial transactions more transparent.Should it not, then, be made compulsory to include the words 'imported honey' on the label of honey produced outside the European Union?This measure can only be introduced for agricultural products, which is one of the reasons for asking for beekeepers' activities to be transferred to DG VI.Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (9 September 1996)The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question E-1972/96 by Mrs Leperre-Verrier ((See page 57. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2206/96 by Francis DECOURRIERE to the Commission. European Union contribution to the International Criminal Tribunal for former Yugoslavia
Date: 1996-08-02
Institutions: DECOURRIERE, European Parliament
Subjects: European Investment Bank, European Regional Development Fund, financing method, road building, road network













EUR-Lex - 91996E2206 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2206

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2206/96 by Francis DECOURRIERE to the Commission. European Union contribution to the International Criminal Tribunal for former Yugoslavia  


Official Journal C 060 , 26/02/1997 P. 0134 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2206/96 by Susan Waddington (PSE) to the Commission (2 August 1996)Subject: European Union contribution to the International Criminal Tribunal for former YugoslaviaThe European Union has contributed indirectly to the International Criminal Tribunal for former Yugoslavia by subsidizing associations assisting it from Chapter B7-52 of the budget, 'European initiative for democracy and the protection of human rights', and in particular, Article B7-527, 'support for rehabilitation centres for torture victims and organizations offering concrete help to victims of human rights abuses'.Can the Commission indicate:1. The amount earmarked for, and paid to, associations for the setting up and operation of the Tribunal?2. The control mechanisms established to ensure the proper use of the funds for their intended purpose?Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (30 September 1996)The Commission can inform the Honourable Member that, since 1994, 2 MECU has been made available under the Community budget for projects in support of the International criminal tribunal on former Yugoslavia, under budget lines B7-5240 and B7-527 (now budget lines B7-7040 and B7-7070).As regards the control mechanisms for ensuring the correct use of funds, each beneficiary signs an undertaking, prior to receipt of the advance payment (normally 80%) which obliges it to submit detailed financial and narrative reports on completion of the project. Further to this, beneficiaries also accept to be inspected by the Commission's financial control department or the Court of auditors should it be deemed necessary. In the event of irregularities being detected, part or all of the grant may be reimbursed.Mention should also be made of evaluation undertaken prior to funding decisions by the Commission which takes into account the reliability of the potential beneficiary, the quality of projects previously carried out and specific expertise in relation to the International criminal tribunal.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2184/96 by Undine-Uta BLOCH von BLOTTNITZ to the Commission. Bird protection - cruelty to animals - the 'chaffinch manoeuvre' in the Harz mountains
Date: 1996-08-02
Institutions: BLOCH VON BLOTTNITZ, European Parliament
Subjects: animal welfare, degree of pollution, directive (EU), protection of animal life, protection of animals, wildlife













EUR-Lex - 91996E2184 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2184

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2184/96 by Undine-Uta BLOCH von BLOTTNITZ to the Commission. Bird protection - cruelty to animals - the 'chaffinch manoeuvre' in the Harz mountains  


Official Journal C 011 , 13/01/1997 P. 0060 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2184/96 by Undine-Uta Bloch von Blottnitz (V) to the Commission (2 August 1996)Subject: Bird protection - cruelty to animals - the 'chaffinch manoeuvre' in the Harz mountainsIn the Harz mountains a curious competition, the 'chaffinch manoeuvre', each year provokes clashes between 'traditionalists' and animal protection groups. In this competition the singing of chaffinches is judged and prizes awarded. Preparatory to the event the birds are kept by their owners for long periods in small, darkened cages. As soon as the birds see sunlight again on the day of the competition, they burst into song. Exactly how long the birds are kept caged in the dark varies from region to region. In the Eastern part of the Harz mountains the birds are kept for several months in complete darkness in cages 25 x 16 x 25 cms in order to stimulate their singing.1. Does the Commission believe these competitions are compatible with the bird-protection directives currently in force in the European Union?2. If not, will the Commission initiate infringement proceedings against Germany for tolerating such competitions and the attendant cruelty to birds on their soil?Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (13 September 1996)The Commission does not consider the facts as put forward by the Honourable Member to be in contradiction with Community law. It is true that Directive 79/409/EEC ((OJ L 103, 25.4.1979. )) on the conservation of wild birds prohibits keeping birds of species the hunting and capture of which is prohibited, included finches. However, this prohibition concerns wild birds and not those bred in captivity.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2196/96 by Karl-Heinz FLORENZ to the Commission. Hospital waste
Date: 1996-08-02
Institutions: European Parliament, FLORENZ
Subjects: biology, disease vector, epidemiology, health risk, medical institution, public health, waste disposal, waste management













EUR-Lex - 91996E2196 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2196

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2196/96 by Karl-Heinz FLORENZ to the Commission. Hospital waste  


Official Journal C 011 , 13/01/1997 P. 0061 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2196/96 by Karl-Heinz Florenz (PPE) to the Commission (2 August 1996)Subject: Hospital wasteIs it true that no report has been submitted to the Commission on hospital waste since no reports pursuant to Directive 91/156/EEC ((OJ L 78, 26.3.1991, p. 32. )) have been received from the Member States?Is the Commission aware of the risks of microbiological contamination through hospital waste, and what action does it intend to take to control this source of risk at Community level?Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (26 September 1996)The Commission is not aware of an obligation to make a specific report on hospital waste. This type of waste is covered by Directive 75/442/EEC on waste, as amended by Directive 91/156/EEC. The Commission is drawing up, on the basis of Member States' reports, a consolidated report on the implementation of Directives 75/442/EEC (waste), 91/689/EEC (hazardous waste), 75/439/EEC (waste oils) and 86/278/EEC (sewage sludge), which will shortly be publicly available.The Commission is aware of the risk of microbiological contamination by hospital waste and a special project group, including representatives from governments, the Commission, industry, environmental and consumer protection organizations, was created within the priority waste streams programme which studied the particular problems posed by hospital waste for several years.On the basis of the results of this project group, which finalised its work in 1995, the Commission is currently examining the need to take action at Community level.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2165/96 by Per GAHRTON to the Commission. Magnus Lemmel's criticism of the Commission
Date: 1996-08-02
Institutions: European Parliament, GAHRTON
Subjects: Economic and Monetary Union, European Monetary System, economic convergence, economic stabilisation, exchange rate, floating rate, monetary cooperation, price stability













EUR-Lex - 91996E2165 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2165

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2165/96 by Per GAHRTON to the Commission. Magnus Lemmel's criticism of the Commission  


Official Journal C 060 , 26/02/1997 P. 0128 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2165/96 by Susan Waddington (PSE) to the Commission (2 August 1996)Subject: Magnus Lemmel's criticism of the CommissionOn 5 July 1996, the Deputy Director-General of DG III, Magnus Lemmel, criticized the Commission's methods of working in the Swedish newspaper Dagens Politik. The same newspaper reported on 9 July 1996 that this had led to Magnus Lemmel being 'called to explain himself to one of Commission President Jacques Santer's closest associates.' In view of the Commission's bad reputation for openness and scrutiny and Sweden's declared aim to increase openness throughout the EU system, it is particularly serious if the Commission's attempts to gag its staff affect a Swedish official.Is it true that Magnus Lemmel has been 'called to explain himself' to a Commission representative? If so, on what grounds? Does the Commission consider that its staff are not entitled to associate with the public in the normal way? Does the Commission have something to hide? What is actually happening behind the Commission's closed doors?Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (1 October 1996)The Commission adopted in 1994 a joint code of conduct with the Council guaranteeing that the public has the widest possible access to documents. Accordingly, every refusal of access to a document has to be specifically justified.As for the performance of the Commission's officials, their rights and obligations are determined in the staff regulations of the Communities. Like any employer, the Commission expects its officials to be active to obtain the best possible results in terms of policies and administration.Therefore, the Commission welcomes and encourages its officials to suggest reforms. High level officials in particular are responsible for making proposals and implementing changes. In this respect, public debate can complement but not replace internal reform processes.It can also be noted that the Commission has recently launched several important initiatives to improve administrative efficiency. The programme to promote sound and efficient management (SEM 2000), spearheaded by Commissioners Liikanen and Gradin, seeks to improve the quality of the Commission's management over time.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2161/96 by Miguel ARIAS CAÑETE to the Commission. Checks on withdrawals of fruit and vegetables in France
Date: 1996-08-02
Institutions: ARIAS CANETE, European Parliament
Subjects: Council of the European Union, European Commission, dairy production, economic stabilisation, farmer, indemnification, non-marketing premium, price stability













EUR-Lex - 91996E2161 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2161

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2161/96 by Miguel ARIAS CAÑETE to the Commission. Checks on withdrawals of fruit and vegetables in France  


Official Journal C 060 , 26/02/1997 P. 0128 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2161/96 by Susan Waddington (PSE) to the Commission (2 August 1996)Subject: Checks on withdrawals of fruit and vegetables in FranceThe Court of Auditors' 1994 Annual Report states that its inspections revealed that in France, there had been no on-site inspections with regard to the free distribution of fruit and vegetables withdrawn from the market, as checks before aid was paid out were based on presentation of a certificate from the recipient organization. Similarly, there were no official, systematic checks to ensure that the produce certified as received was used by the recipient and did not form part of their normal purchases.In view of the Commission's reply to the Court of Auditors, that its inspectors would carry out a detailed investigation into this matter, what have been the results of these inspections, what measures have been taken by the Commission to rectify the situation and what were the financial implications?Answer given by Mr Fischler on be half of the Commission (9 September 1996)The Commission is not in possession of evidence to prove that free distribution operations in this Member State were carried out in a way which did not comply with Community rules.Furthermore, the Commission would point out that the Court of auditors has not suggested that the alleged weaknesses should result in financial corrections being applied.This matter will however be examined during the next on-the-spot inspection in this Member State and any financial consequences which prove justified will be drawn in the clearance of the accounts of the 1994 year.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1566/96 of 2 August 1996 amending Regulations (EC) No 1749/95 and (EC) No 2900/95 fixing export taxes on cereal products
Date: 1996-08-02
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: export tax, meslin, wheat













EUR-Lex - 31996R1566 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



31996R1566

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1566/96 of 2 August 1996 amending Regulations (EC) No 1749/95 and (EC) No 2900/95 fixing export taxes on cereal products  


Official Journal L 193 , 03/08/1996 P. 0024 - 0025 





COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1566/96 of 2 August 1996 amending Regulations (EC) No 1749/95 and (EC) No 2900/95 fixing export taxes on cereal products THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 of 30 June 1992 on the common organization of the market in the cereals (1), as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 923/96 (2), and in particular Article 16 thereof,Whereas Commission Regulation (EC) No 1749/95 (3) as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1062/96 (4), fixes an export tax for durum wheat falling within CN code 1001 10 00;Wheres Commission Regulation (EC) No 2900/95 (5), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1062/96, fixes an export tax for common wheat falling within CN code 1001 90 99;Whereas prices on the world market for durum wheat and common wheat have changed; whereas the level of the taxes should be adjusted to the new market situation; whereas, therefore, the export taxes on durum wheat and common wheat should be reduced;Whereas the Annexes to Regulations (EC) No 1749/95 and (EC) No 2900/95 should therefore be amended;Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals,HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:Article 1 The Annex to Regulation (EC) No 1749/95 is replaced by Annex I hereto.Article 2 The Annex to Regulation (EC) No 2900/95 is replaced by Annex II hereto.Article 3 This Regulation shall enter into force on 3 August 1996.This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.Done at Brussels, 2 August 1996.For the CommissionChristos PAPOUTSISMember of the Commission(1) OJ No L 181, 1. 7. 1992, p. 21.(2) OJ No L 126, 24. 5. 1996, p. 37.(3) OJ No L 169, 19. 7. 1995, p. 21.(4) OJ No L 140, 13. 6. 1996, p. 28.(5) OJ No L 304, 16. 12. 1995, p. 27.ANNEX I 'ANNEX>TABLE>ANNEX II 'ANNEX>TABLE>
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2148/96 by Richard HOWITT to the Commission. Article 10 Programme
Date: 1996-08-02
Institutions: European Parliament, HOWITT
Subjects: EU programme, European Parliament, European Regional Development Fund, democracy, invitation to tender, local authority, national, political participation, recommendation (EU), town planning













EUR-Lex - 91996E2148 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2148

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2148/96 by Richard HOWITT to the Commission. Article 10 Programme  


Official Journal C 011 , 13/01/1997 P. 0054 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2148/96 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (2 August 1996)Subject: Article 10 ProgrammeWhat progress has the Commission made under the Article 10 Programme in response to Parliament's recommendation that urban pilot projects are made available to smaller towns under the previous 10 000 population threshold, and for the setting up of a European network of local authorities cooperating on issues of democratic initiatives and citizen participation?Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (20 September 1996)Following the Parliament's recommendation the Commission reworded the call ((OJ C 319, 31.11.1995. )) for urban pilot project proposals under Article 10 of the European regional development fund Regulation ((OJ L 193, 31. 7.1993. )).As far as the 100,000 population threshold is concerned, the above call specified that '... smaller towns could also be accepted, provided they have a marked urban economy and social structure, play a central role within a region, or are adjacent peri-urban conurbations of large cities.'Concerning issues of democratic initiatives and citizen participation, the same call made explicit mention, among other possible themes for action, of 'the establishment of partnerships and citizens' participation'.