do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2217/96 by Roberta ANGELILLI to the Commission. Use of Structural Funds in Italian regions
Date: 1996-08-09
Institutions: ANGELILLI, European Parliament
Subjects: Structural Funds, distribution of aid, regional development, use of aid













EUR-Lex - 91996E2217 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2217

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2217/96 by Roberta ANGELILLI to the Commission. Use of Structural Funds in Italian regions  


Official Journal C 365 , 04/12/1996 P. 0094 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2217/96 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission (9 August 1996)Subject: Use of Structural Funds in Italian regionsIn March 1996 the Commission urged the Italian Government to ensure that European money was put to the proper use in good time, given that, as at January 1996, no more than about 6% of the funds available for Objectives 3 and 4, among others, had been disbursed and the average outturn was somewhere under 5%.Could the Commission furnish a report (if only as a rough guide) on the expenditure incurred in Italian regions (in particular Latium, Umbria, Marche, and Tuscany) in connection with Objectives 2, 5b, 3, and 4?Joint answer to Written Questions E-2217/96 and E-2665/96 given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (23 October 1996)The Commission is sending the information requested direct to the Honourable Members and to Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2257/96 by Katerina DASKALAKI to the Commission. Problems concerning subsidies for olive oil producers
Date: 1996-08-09
Institutions: DASKALAKI, European Parliament
Subjects: Greece, agricultural guidance, common organisation of markets, olive oil, olive-growing, production aid, proposal (EU)













EUR-Lex - 91996E2257 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2257

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2257/96 by Katerina DASKALAKI to the Commission. Problems concerning subsidies for olive oil producers  


Official Journal C 011 , 13/01/1997 P. 0072 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2257/96 by Katerina Daskalaki (UPE) to the Commission (9 August 1996)Subject: Problems concerning subsidies for olive oil producersIs the Commission aware of the serious problems Greek olive oil producers will face if producer subsidies are fixed by tree (and not by kilo of product - the practice hitherto) and if the related changes set out in its new proposals aimed at restructuring the olive oil market are adopted?Is it aware also that the yield in olives and oil depends on many factors apart from the country of production (for example, climate, soil, variety, care taken by the producer, etc.)? Are these proposals based on a scientific study or merely on auditing data? How does it view the fact that Greece has no olive oil register and what does it intend to do to remedy this situation?Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (23 September 1996)The Commission has not yet adopted a position and therefore has not yet adopted a proposal on the forthcoming reform of the common organization of the market in olive oil.Various drafts will be considered. The Commission is also aware of the fact that olive and olive oil yields depend on various parameters, as the Honourable Member points out. However, its choice in presenting a proposal to the Council will be determined in the light of all the factors and all aspects of the question in the interests of Community growers and other socio-professional groups.Given recent experience with the common organization of the market, especially in each of the olive-growing Member States (the biggest consumers), this proposal will seek to simplify the scheme and take greater account than before of the social and environmental dimensions of olive growing.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2216/96 by Roberta ANGELILLI to the Commission. China - nuclear tests and human rights violations
Date: 1996-08-09
Institutions: ANGELILLI, European Parliament
Subjects: China, EU relations, UNO, death penalty, environmental protection, human rights, international relations, nuclear non-proliferation, nuclear test, torture













EUR-Lex - 91996E2216 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2216

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2216/96 by Roberta ANGELILLI to the Commission. China - nuclear tests and human rights violations  


Official Journal C 011 , 13/01/1997 P. 0065 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2216/96 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission (9 August 1996)Subject: China - nuclear tests and human rights violationsA number of environmentalist and human rights organizations (Amnesty International, Greenpeace, Fare Verde, etc.) have been staging demonstrations in Italy in recent months in order to draw the attention of the public and national and international bodies both to the numerous Chinese nuclear tests (China has never complied with the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and carried out its 44th underground nuclear test in June) and to the fact that 68 crimes carry the death penalty (imprisonment for reasons of conscience has led to downright oppression of the Tibetan minority).Has the Commission formally expressed its disapproval to China on account of the nuclear testing and the continual human rights violations? If not, does it intend to take the necessary steps?Answer given by Sir Leon Brittan on behalf of the Commission (4 October 1996)The Commission welcomes the recent adoption by the UN Security Council of the nuclear test ban treaty to which China reacted positively. As one of the nuclear powers it has been party to the Non-Proliferation Treaty since 1992.China and the EU have established a framework for regular dialogue on the issue of human rights in which all matters of concern to either party are broached in a constructive spirit.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2251/96 by Elly PLOOIJ-VAN GORSEL to the Commission. Import of non-refillable lighters
Date: 1996-08-09
Institutions: European Parliament, PLOOIJ-VAN GORSEL
Subjects: Mexico, Philippines, Thailand, anti-dumping duty, import, manufactured goods, restriction on competition













EUR-Lex - 91996E2251 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2251

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2251/96 by Elly PLOOIJ-VAN GORSEL to the Commission. Import of non-refillable lighters  


Official Journal C 365 , 04/12/1996 P. 0098 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2251/96 by Elly Plooij-van Gorsel (ELDR) to the Commission (9 August 1996)Subject: Import of non-refillable lighters1. What is the reason for the joint assessment of Mexico, the Philippines and Thailand in respect of imports of non-refillable gas lighters? What specific (economic) evidence is needed to prove that imports from these countries really are competing significantly with each other and with similar EU products in order to assess the cumulative effect of these imports?2. Given the differences in the definition of 'damage' in a preliminary inquiry and in the original inquiries, is cumulation permitted by law, in particular if the product from one of the sources is stable and has no direct impact on European industry?3. When it assesses price competition, how does the Commission take account of the obvious major differences between the products in respect of quality and reputation?4. If imports from many different countries are able, within a short space of time, to take the place of imports from those countries which are affected by the anti-dumping measures, if smuggling is not controlled and competition and causality are negligible, why would it be in the interests of the EU to adhere to the existing anti-dumping measures for lighters from individual countries?5. In the light of these circumstances, why does the Commission feel it is necessary to close off part of the EC market and to deprive the European consumer of a free choice between products from different countries through anti-dumping duties or undertakings in respect of a review of prices?Answer given by Sir Leon Brittan on behalf of the Commission (20 September 1996)The questions asked by the Honourable Member refer to anti-dumping investigations still under way; as the conclusions still have to be drawn and so cannot be communicated to the Member States or officially divulged to the parties concerned, the Commission regrets that it cannot give the details requested.The parties concerned who have already made their views known to the Commission or sent their comments in writing will be informed in due time of all the preliminary conclusions on the matter and will be asked to state their points of view. The Commission can assure the Honourable Member that the remarks then expressed by all the parties concerned will be examined and will be taken into account wherever there are grounds for doing so.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2250/96 by Umberto BOSSI to the Commission. Translation of documents relating to actions under the fourth RTD framework programme
Date: 1996-08-09
Institutions: BOSSI, European Parliament
Subjects: EU publication, invitation to tender, medical research, restriction on competition, translation













EUR-Lex - 91996E2250 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2250

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2250/96 by Umberto BOSSI to the Commission. Translation of documents relating to actions under the fourth RTD framework programme  


Official Journal C 365 , 04/12/1996 P. 0097 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2250/96 by Umberto Bossi (ELDR) to the Commission (9 August 1996)Subject: Translation of documents relating to actions under the fourth RTD framework programmeWith reference to the brief answer given to Written Question E-1255/96, I should like to ask the Commission to specify more clearly:1. on the basis of what criteria it favours certain Community languages rather than others for the publication of background documentation and application forms relating to RTD framework programmes;2. whether it does not consider that the delays in publishing background material on the programmes in all the official languages in effect discriminates against companies from countries whose national language is not one of those given priority (English, French and German);3. whether it does not consider that this arbitrary choice in actual fact amounts to a tacit endorsement of 'unfair competition' between firms in the various Member States of the EU;4. what steps it intends to take to ensure equal opportunities for access (i.e. publication in a clearly understandable language) to RTD programmes for all firms in the Union?Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (28 October 1996)The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to his Written Question E-1255/96 ((OJ C 322, 28.10.1996, p. 45. )).That answer is still valid.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2235/96 by Sérgio RIBEIRO , Honório NOVO to the Commission. Poseima-agriculture programme - support for wine production in Madeira
Date: 1996-08-09
Institutions: European Parliament, NOVO, RIBEIRO
Subjects: Community support framework, EU programme, Madeira, Portugal, aid system, fortified wine, production aid, wine of superior quality













EUR-Lex - 91996E2235 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2235

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2235/96 by Sérgio RIBEIRO , Honório NOVO to the Commission. Poseima-agriculture programme - support for wine production in Madeira  


Official Journal C 011 , 13/01/1997 P. 0067 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2235/96 by Sérgio Ribeiro (GUE/NGL) and Honório Novo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (9 August 1996)Subject: Poseima-agriculture programme - support for wine production in MadeiraWine production is of crucial importance in the autonomous region of Madeira.Can the Commission say whether the current support framework for wine production in Madeira is being implemented strictly as part of Poseima or whether this support is being granted through other Community policies? If the latter is the case, can the Commission say what specific measures and amounts have been provided under the support framework for wine production in Madeira?Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (24 September 1996)Council Regulation (EEC) No 1600/92 ((OJ L 173, 27.6.1992. )) provides for Community assistance for the production of Madeira liqueur wines via aid towards the purchase of rectified concentrated must (ECU 12.08 per hectolitre for amaximum amount of 3 600 hectolitres per growing season) and wine alcohol and aid for the ageing process of these wines (currently ECU 0.02379 per hectolitre per day for a maximum of 20 000 hectolitres per annum); it also provides for a lump sum to support the cultivation of vines aimed at producing quality wines in traditional growing areas. The lump sum is currently ECU 476.76 ECU per hectare.The intervention measures under Title III of Council Regulation (EEC) No 822/87 of 16 March 1987 on the common organization of the market in wine and the Community grubbing arrangements do not apply to Madeira.Under the multifund operational programme for the autonomous region of Madeira approved by the Commission on 4 March 1994, ECU 1.8 million was set aside in assistance towards improving winegrowing structures.This programme is part of the Community support framework for structural intervention schemes in Portugal for the period 1994-99.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2234/96 by Sérgio RIBEIRO , Honório NOVO to the Commission. Poseima-fisheries programme
Date: 1996-08-09
Institutions: European Parliament, NOVO, RIBEIRO
Subjects: Azores, EAGGF Guarantee Section, EU aid, EU programme, Madeira, compensatory financing, fishery product, fishing industry













EUR-Lex - 91996E2234 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2234

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2234/96 by Sérgio RIBEIRO , Honório NOVO to the Commission. Poseima-fisheries programme  


Official Journal C 011 , 13/01/1997 P. 0067 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2234/96 by Sérgio Ribeiro (GUE/NGL) and Honório Novo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (9 August 1996)Subject: Poseima-fisheries programmeIn accordance with Section 14.9 of the Poseima programme, on 30 July 1992 the Commission adopted a measure for the fisheries sectors in the Azores and Madeira with a duration of two years (1992 and 1993) and an allocation of ECU 8.04 million in addition to the CSF appropriations. ECU 2.5 million of these appropriations, equally divided between the two autonomous regions, were earmarked for structural investments, while the remainder was to be used to maintain fishing activities and the tuna-processing industry. The Poseima-fisheries measure was extended at least until the end of 1994.Can the Commission say whether it was extended again for 1995 and 1996? Were the appropriations used for these extensions (in 1994 and, possibly, 1995 and 1996) also in addition to the CSF in force?Can the Commission say why it did not initially and still does not consider it necessary to support fishing for and processing of small pelagic and demersal species, which play an important role in the two autonomous regions, in line with, for example, the fisheries measures introduced under the Poseican (Canary Islands) programme?Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (7 October 1996)The support scheme for marketing fishery products from the Azores and Madeira under the Poseima programme was approved by the Council on 2 October 1995 when it adopted Regulation (EC) No 2337/95, which extended the system introduced in 1992 until 31 December 1997. ((OJ L 236, 5.10.1995. ))The scheme is financed from the Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund and is therefore additional to the Community support framework.As regards the other species to which the Honourable Members refer, I would point out that the scheme is intended to compensate for the additional costs incurred in marketing certain products outside the regions concerned; it has yet to be shown that such additional marketing costs apply to other species.
96/508/CFSP: Council Decision of 9 August 1996 setting the date on which Joint Action 96/442/CFSP adopted by the Council on 15 July 1996 shall take effect
Date: 1996-08-09
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Bosnia and Herzegovina, EU aid, local government, management audit, the EU's international role, town













EUR-Lex - 31996D0508 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



31996D0508

96/508/CFSP: Council Decision of 9 August 1996 setting the date on which Joint Action 96/442/CFSP adopted by the Council on 15 July 1996 shall take effect  


Official Journal L 212 , 21/08/1996 P. 0001 - 0001 





COUNCIL DECISION of 9 August 1996 setting the date on which Joint Action 96/442/CFSP adopted by the Council on 15 July 1996 shall take effect (96/508/CFSP)THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article J.3 thereof,Having regard to the general guidelines given by the European Council meeting in Corfu on 24 and 25 June 1994,Whereas, with a view to a continued European Union presence to consolidate the achievements of the European Union Administration of Mostar (EUAM) after its expiry on 22 July 1996, the Council adopted on 15 July 1996 Joint Action 96/442/CFSP (1) on the nomination of a Special Envoy of the EU in the city of Mostar, to take effect once the conditions set out in Article 10 were fulfilled;Whereas, since those conditions were not fulfilled, on 26 July 1996 the Council adopted Joint Action 96/476/CFSP (2) on interim arrangements, which expired on 4 August 1996;Whereas the conditions set out in Article 10 of Joint Action 96/442/CFSP have now been fulfilled,HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:Article 11. The European Union notes that the conditions set out in Article 10 of Joint Action 96/442/CFSP have been fulfilled.2. Consequently, Joint Action 96/442/CFSP shall take effect as from 5 August 1996.Article 2This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption. It shall be published in the Official Journal.Done at Brussels, 9 August 1996.For the CouncilThe PresidentD. SPRING(1) OJ No L 185, 24. 7. 1996, p. 2.(2) OJ No L 195, 6. 8. 1996, p. 1.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2239/96 by Anita POLLACK to the Commission. Pollution in the Gulf of Thailand
Date: 1996-08-09
Institutions: European Parliament, POLLACK
Subjects: South-East Asia, fish product, fishing area, gulf, import, metal pollution













EUR-Lex - 91996E2239 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2239

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2239/96 by Anita POLLACK to the Commission. Pollution in the Gulf of Thailand  


Official Journal C 011 , 13/01/1997 P. 0070 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2239/96 by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission (9 August 1996)Subject: Pollution in the Gulf of ThailandIs the Commission aware of the level of heavy metal pollution in the Gulf of Thailand and is it aware of the source of this pollution? How much fish product is imported into the EU from this region? Is it used for human consumption as well as pet food?Answer given by Mr Marin on behalf of the Commission (7 October 1996)The Commission has no official information regarding the level of pollution in the gulf of Thailand.The import figures from the four countries bordering the gulf of Thailand are shown in the table below. However, since all these countries save Cambodia have fishing grounds outside the gulf, no estimate can be made of the share of imports originating in the gulf and the final use of these products.>TABLE>
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2220/96 by Giuseppe RAUTI to the Commission. Practice of dental-oral medicine
Date: 1996-08-09
Institutions: European Parliament, RAUTI
Subjects: Italy, application of EU law, capacity to exercise rights, dental medicine, general medicine













EUR-Lex - 91996E2220 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2220

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2220/96 by Giuseppe RAUTI to the Commission. Practice of dental-oral medicine  


Official Journal C 356 , 25/11/1996 P. 0123 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2220/96 by Giuseppe Rauti (NI) to the Commission (9 August 1996)Subject: Practice of dental-oral medicineRecent court cases have once again highlighted the problem affecting the practice of dental-oral medicine. Hundreds of properly qualified doctors recently chained themselves up outside the Chamber of Deputies in Rome in order to protest against their 'outlaw' status.A confused and delicate legal situation - which now affects 3 500 Italian doctors - has arisen, not least on account of Community Directives 78/686/EEC ((OJ L 233, 24.8.1978, p. 1. )) and 78/687/EEC ((OJ L 233, 24.8.1978, p. 10. )), transposed in Italy in Law 409/185, and the subsequent ruling by the Court of Justice, handed down on 1 June 1985 after a series of appeals to the EEC, which 'quashed' the 1988 Italian Law No 471.In the light of the foregoing, will the Commission not give a 'definitive' interpretation of the Community legislation governing the practice of this important specialized branch of medicine, thereby providing guidance for the various governments and, above all, helping to clarify the position in Italy?Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (16 September 1996)The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Questions E-0836/96 ((OJ C 280, 25.9.1996, p. 90. )) and E-1522/96 by Mrs Muscardini ((See page 52. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2229/96 by Sérgio RIBEIRO , Honório NOVO to the Commission. Poseima-craft programme
Date: 1996-08-09
Institutions: European Parliament, NOVO, RIBEIRO
Subjects: Community support framework, EU aid, EU programme, Madeira, handicrafts, project evaluation, regional aid, report













EUR-Lex - 91996E2229 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2229

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2229/96 by Sérgio RIBEIRO , Honório NOVO to the Commission. Poseima-craft programme  


Official Journal C 083 , 14/03/1997 P. 0009 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2229/96 by Sérgio Ribeiro (GUE/NGL) and Honório Novo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (9 August 1996)Subject: Poseima-craft programmeCouncil Decision 91/315/EEC ((OJ L 171, 29.6.1991, p. 5. )) of 26 January 1991 set up a programme of options specific to the remote and insular nature of Madeira and the Azores (Poseima).Section 16.1 of this programme makes provision for Community measures to assist small craft businesses (embroidery, rug-making, ceramics, basketry) - the Poseima-craft programme - which was approved at the end of 1992 for the three-year period 1992-94, with an allocation of ECU 6 million in addition to the CSF appropriations.Can the Commission confirm what specific measures were implemented over the three-year period 1992-94 in the autonomous region of the Azores under the Poseima-craft programme and what sums were disbursed in each of the measures carried out?Can the Commission say whether the Poseima-craft programme has been closed or whether it is to be extended?If it has been closed, has any independent financial provision been made to continue the measures introduced?Joint answer to Written Questions E-2229/96 and E-2230/96 given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (16 October 1996)A number of measures were financed under the craft provisions of the Poseima programme for the Madeira and Azores autonomous regions to help local businesses making e.g. embroidery, tapestries, ceramics and baskework. Support took the form of training schemes, help with the introduction of new technology and access to new markets.The total earmarked for craft businesses under the programme approved by the Commission was ECU 6 million. The Commission has just received the Portuguese government's final report on the Poseima measures and will be studying it closely.The new operational programmes for the two autonomous regions approved as part of the Community support framework for Portugal 1994-99 reflect considerations similar to those underlying Poseima.