do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2376/96 by Gianfranco DELL'ALBA to the Commission. 1997 Preliminary draft budget
Date: 1996-08-27
Institutions: DELL'ALBA, European Parliament
Subjects: EU institution, civil servant, private sector, public administration, servant (EU)













EUR-Lex - 91996E2376 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2376

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2376/96 by Gianfranco DELL'ALBA to the Commission. 1997 Preliminary draft budget  


Official Journal C 060 , 26/02/1997 P. 0145 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2376/96 by Susan Waddington (PSE) to the Commission (27 August 1996)Subject: 1997 Preliminary draft budgetWith regard to Item A-1520 (national and international officials and private sector staff temporarily assigned to services of the institution), can the Commission provide details of national officials by country and directorate-general?Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (7 October 1996)The 1996 appropriations for budget heading A-1520 represent 592 person/years.In its allocation of resources, the Commission used the appropriations as shown in the table sent directly to the Honourable Member and to the Secretariat-General of Parliament.A breakdown by nationality and directorate-general, on the basis of the seconded national experts 'physically present' in August 1996, is included in the same document.You will note that reference is made, on the one hand, to allocations in person/years and, on the other, to persons who are 'physically present'. An accurate picture of the number of person/years can only be established in hindsight.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2301/96 by Richard HOWITT to the Commission. Target times for payments of disability NGO grants under Helios 2
Date: 1996-08-27
Institutions: European Parliament, HOWITT
Subjects: EU aid, disabled person, financial management, management audit, non-governmental organisation, payment, use of aid













EUR-Lex - 91996E2301 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2301

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2301/96 by Richard HOWITT to the Commission. Target times for payments of disability NGO grants under Helios 2  


Official Journal C 365 , 04/12/1996 P. 0106 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2301/96 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (27 August 1996)Subject: Target times for payments of disability NGO grants under Helios 2Does the Commission have target times for payments of disability NGO grants under the Helios 2 programme? Can it also explain why there are substantial delays in payments of NGO grants which are causing severe disruption in the NGO part of the programme?Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (3 October 1996)In accordance with the conditions set out in any grant contract, payments are made within a 60-day period starting with signature of the contract by both parties. The delays referred to are essentially due to the fact that public funds are being allocated, and certain financial controls are required in such cases to ensure that the money is being properly used in a manner consistent with the principles of good financial management.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2327/96 by Gianni TAMINO to the Commission. The system of compensation for beef and veal (SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER)
Date: 1996-08-27
Institutions: European Parliament, TAMINO
Subjects: EU aid, Italy, State aid, agricultural guidance, cattle, livestock farming, restriction on competition













EUR-Lex - 91996E2327(01) - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2327(01)

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2327/96 by Gianni TAMINO to the Commission. The system of compensation for beef and veal (SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER)  


Official Journal C 096 , 24/03/1997 P. 0001 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2327/96 by Gianni Tamino (V) to the Commission (27 August 1996)Subject: The system of compensation for beef and vealIn its circular No 18 of 16 July 1996 AIMA (Italian authority for agricultural market intervention) laid down the rules for implementing the system of compensation which amounts to Lit 125 billion, combining Community and national funding, allocated to beef and veal producers for animals slaughtered between 1 May 1996 and 15 August 1996.Does the Commission consider the terms of this circular to be compatible with European guidelines?In particular, does the Commission consider the Italian decision to distribute additional compensation for animals weighing more than 470 kg, i.e. more than the 400-410 kg envisaged by the Union, to be legitimate?Supplementary answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (9 December 1996)Further to its answer of 26 September 1996 ((OJ C 305, 15.10.1996. )), the Commission is now in a position to provide the following information.Firstly, it should be stressed that, according to information made available to the Commission, Italy has opted for the aid allocation method allowing the Member States maximum flexibility, with the proviso, however, that the aid is allocated objectively, avoiding overcompensating producers and any distortion of competition. In this connection, the Honourable Member should refer to the Commission's answer to Written Question E-1509/96 from Mr Musumeci ((OJ L 175, 13.7.1996. )).As for the compatibility of the compensation specified in AIMA Circular No 18 of 16 July 1996, and in particular Italy's decision to pay an additional premium on animals exceeding the weight limit laid down for intervention, with the Council's provisions on the aid provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1357/96 providing for additional payments to be made in 1996 with the premiums referred to in Regulation (EEC) No 805/68 on the common organization of the market in beef and veal ((OJ L 175, 13.7.1996. )), the Commission considers that, on the basis of the information in its possession and without going into economic details which are currently beyond its capacity to analyse, the abovementioned decision calls for no remarks. The Commission can hardly oppose the Italian authorities' decision to compensate certain producers who, in their view, have been unable to sell their livestock at the optimum point of growth as a result of serious market disturbance and have accordingly had to keep them, with the attendant inevitable increase in weight and substantial loss of income.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2345/96 by Richard HOWITT to the Commission. European finance given for mental health
Date: 1996-08-27
Institutions: European Parliament, HOWITT
Subjects: EU statistics, competence of the Member States, mortality, patient's rights, psychiatric institution













EUR-Lex - 91996E2345 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2345

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2345/96 by Richard HOWITT to the Commission. European finance given for mental health  


Official Journal C 365 , 04/12/1996 P. 0110 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2345/96 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (27 August 1996)Subject: European finance given for mental healthDoes the Commission have a record of how many ECT and/or lobotomy operations were carried out within the Member States during the last ten years?Does the Commission have a record of how many deaths occurred in psychiatric/mental health institutions over the last ten years along with the cause of death?Does the Commission have any intention to propose a European Directive that would protect the rights of people under psychiatric care?Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (3 October 1996)The Commission does not have the information requested by the Honourable Member.As the responsibility for health care lies with Member States, the Commission has no intention to propose legislation in this area.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2311/96 by Philippe MONFILS to the Commission. Name of parts of the euro
Date: 1996-08-27
Institutions: European Parliament, MONFILS
Subjects: Monetary Committee (EU), euro, linguistics, paper money, product designation, terminology













EUR-Lex - 91996E2311 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2311

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2311/96 by Philippe MONFILS to the Commission. Name of parts of the euro  


Official Journal C 060 , 26/02/1997 P. 0141 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2311/96 by Susan Waddington (PSE) to the Commission (27 August 1996)Subject: Name of parts of the euroRegarding the launch of the euro, the future single currency, the Union's Monetary Committee decided at its meeting in Brussels on 9 April 1996 that the coins to be issued would be denominated in multiples - 1, 2, 5, 10, 20, 50, and so forth - of a smaller monetary unit called a... cent.The word 'cent' plainly means nothing to French-speaking countries. Indeed, the natural French pronunciation could lead to confusion with other French words such as 'sans' ('without').What is more, the system appears to have been copied from the division of the dollar, hardly an appropriate model for the single European currency.Could the Commission say whether division of the euro into 'cents' is irrevocable official policy?If so, who took the decision?Would it not be desirable to find a name on which, like the euro itself, all the Member States could agree?Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission (26 September 1996)The issue of what to call the hundredth part of the euro was discussed by the Economics and Finance Ministers at their Verona meeting on 13 April. Their choice was the word 'cent'.Those initial discussions were designed to prepare the way for the decision that will be taken by the Heads of State or Government. The name of the subdivision of the euro will be decided when the European Council adopts at the end of the year the Regulation laying down the legal status of the euro as from 1 January 1999.As with the name for the single currency, the decision will have be in favour of a name that is short, simple and easy to pronounce in all the languages of the European Union.Although opting for the word 'cent', the Ministers took the view that this did not rule out continued national usage in everyday language. Thus, French speakers could call the subdivision of the ecu the 'centime'.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2317/96 by Martina GREDLER to the Commission. Award of public contracts in St Pölten, Lower Austria
Date: 1996-08-27
Institutions: European Parliament, GREDLER
Subjects: Austria, Court of Justice of the European Union, European Commission, administrative procedure, free movement of goods, infringement of EU law, infringement procedure (EU), public contract, works contract













EUR-Lex - 91996E2317 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2317

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2317/96 by Martina GREDLER to the Commission. Award of public contracts in St Pölten, Lower Austria  


Official Journal C 072 , 07/03/1997 P. 0029 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2317/96 by Martina Gredler (ELDR) to the Commission (27 August 1996)Subject: Award of public contracts in St Pölten, Lower AustriaThe NÖPLAN Landhaus and Kulturbezirk projects in St Pölten were not awarded in accordance with the directives.Which directives concerning public calls for tender were not observed?What are the associated consequences for the Land of Lower Austria?Will this endanger participation in EU programmes, in so far as they concern programmes for Lower Austria?If so, which ones?Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (28 October 1996)In the view of the Commission, the public procurement procedures followed in the case of the St. Pölten cultural and administrative centre involved a number of breaches of Directive 93/37/EEC of 14 June 1993 concerning the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, ((OJ L 199, 9.8.1993. )) a breach of Directive 89/665/EEC of 21 December 1989 on the coordination of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the application of review procedures to the award of public supply and public works contracts ((OJ L 395, 30.12.1989. )) and a breach of Article 30 of the EC Treaty (free movement of goods).Furthermore, the Lower Austrian law on public procurement, which came into effect only in the course of 1995, contained a specific provision excluding in practice the St. Pölten project from the scope of the rules it laid down. Following criticism from the Commission, the law has now been amended.In connection with the St. Pölten project, the Commission has initiated proceedings under Article 169 of the EC Treaty against Austria, which is responsible under Community law for the actions of Lower Austria. The Commission has also decided to refer this case to the Court of Justice.In addition to the action taken by the Commission, Lower Austria may have to suffer the consequences of measures taken directly by aggrieved tenderers. They could, firstly, initiate review procedures through the relevant Lower Austrian authorities. Secondly, they could exercise any rights they may have to damages, such as loss of earnings, and obtain compensation under Austrian civil law.The co-financing of projects proposed by Lower Austria in the context of EU programmes will not be placed in jeopardy as a result of the St. Pölten affair.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2343/96 by Richard HOWITT to the Council. Council decisions blocked by the UK Government's policy of non-cooperation
Date: 1996-08-27
Institutions: European Parliament, HOWITT
Subjects: Council of the European Union, United Kingdom, animal disease, cattle, decision (EU), unanimity













EUR-Lex - 91996E2343 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2343

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2343/96 by Richard HOWITT to the Council. Council decisions blocked by the UK Government's policy of non-cooperation  


Official Journal C 072 , 07/03/1997 P. 0031 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2343/96 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Council (27 August 1996)Subject: Council decisions blocked by the UK Government's policy of non-cooperationCan the Council list all the decisions blocked by the UK Government's policy of non-cooperation over the BSE crisis, indicating against each whether the proposal has been dropped or a provisional date when each is to be rediscussed by the Council?Answer (13 December 1996)As the Honourable Member has recalled, a number of texts, approval of which required unanimity, were not able to be approved at various Council sessions in the period between 28 May 1996 and 20 June 1996 solely because of reservations entered by the United Kingdom in relation with the latter's position on the BSE question.One of the 36 texts in question - the joint action concerning action by the Union to support the electoral process in Bosnia and Herzegovina - was adopted by the Council (General Affairs) at its session on 10 June 1996. The other 35 were all adopted at Council sessions subsequent to the meeting of the European Council in Florence on 21/22 June 1996.The Council is taking steps to have the list of the texts in question sent directly to the Honourable Member, together with an indication of the Council sessions at which they were adopted.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2297/96 by Ursula SCHLEICHER to the Council. Conclusions of the Council of 18 June 1996 on transmissible spongiform encephalopathies
Date: 1996-08-27
Institutions: European Parliament, SCHLEICHER
Subjects: EU Member State, disease of the nervous system, epidemiology, exchange of information, health legislation, health risk, infectious disease, public health













EUR-Lex - 91996E2297 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2297

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2297/96 by Ursula SCHLEICHER to the Council. Conclusions of the Council of 18 June 1996 on transmissible spongiform encephalopathies  


Official Journal C 105 , 03/04/1997 P. 0006 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2297/96 by Ursula Schleicher (PPE) to the Council (27 August 1996)Subject: Conclusions of the Council of 18 June 1996 on transmissible spongiform encephalopathiesIn its conclusions of 18 June 1996 the Council made the recommendation that the epidemiological monitoring of CJD (Creutzfeld-Jakob disease) should be extended to all Member States using the procedures already applied in five Member States.Does this wording mean that Creutzfeld Jakob disease has been made a notifiable disease in all Member States of the European Union?If not, what steps does the Council intend to take to introduce such a procedure?Answer (13 February 1997)In the conclusions on transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs) cited by the Honourable Member, the Council made a number of recommendations concerning suggested measures to eliminate the actual or potential risks connected with such diseases, including the extension to all Member States of epidemiological surveillance of Creutzfeld-Jakob disease (CJD) using the same methods as had been applied in five of them.Those recommendations do not, as such, have any binding effect but are the expression of a political will directed towards the Commission and the Member States in particular. The Honourable Member's first question has therefore to be answered in the negative at this point.As regards the second question, the Council would point out that the proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council, based on Article 129 of the EC Treaty, setting up a network for the epidemiological surveillance and monitoring of transmissible diseases within the European Community provides for the communication of information on a range of transmissible diseases, including those transmitted by unconventional agents, of which CJD is one. That proposal, on which Parliament recently delivered its Opinion, is currently under discussion within the Council.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2310/96 by Laura GONZÁLEZ ÁLVAREZ , María SORNOSA MARTÍNEZ to the Commission. Canalization of the Lagares river, Santo Tomé de Freixeiro (Vigo, Spain)
Date: 1996-08-27
Institutions: European Parliament, GONZALEZ ALVAREZ, SORNOSA MARTINEZ
Subjects: Spain, application of EU law, ecosystem, environmental impact, hydraulic works, impact study, watercourse













EUR-Lex - 91996E2310 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2310

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2310/96 by Laura GONZÁLEZ ÁLVAREZ , María SORNOSA MARTÍNEZ to the Commission. Canalization of the Lagares river, Santo Tomé de Freixeiro (Vigo, Spain)  


Official Journal C 365 , 04/12/1996 P. 0107 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2310/96 by Laura González Álvarez (GUE/NGL) and María Sornosa Martínez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (27 August 1996)Subject: Canalization of the Lagares river, Santo Tomé de Freixeiro (Vigo, Spain)In the locality of Santo Tomé de Freixeiro the river Lagares is currently being canalized, with concrete panels being placed on its bed and banks. This cement casing, which is some 400 m long, has produced visible changes in the ecological balance and in the ecosystem of the Lagares river. These include:- the destruction of the river's natural bed in this part of its course, now that it has been covered with concrete;- the narrowing of the river: the casing has penetrated its source, leading to the total disappearance of vegetation from its banks;- there is an obvious visual impact: the concrete casing is, over most of its length, between 1 m and 2.5 m higher than the natural ground level of the area.Can the Commission, with a view to ensuring that Community environmental law is respected and complied with, carry out an investigation to determine whether this development affecting the Lagares river is not in breach of any Community legislation?Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (16 September 1996)The Commission is not familiar with the situation described by the Honourable Members.However, since this could conflict with Council Directive 85/337/EEC ((OJ EC L 175, 5.7.1985. )) of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the impact of certain public and private projects on the environment, the Commission will contact the Spanish authorities and ask them for their comments.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2322/96 by Angela SIERRA GONZÁLEZ , Marjatta STENIUS-KAUKONEN , Honório NOVO , Sérgio RIBEIRO to the Commission. Late payment to trainees
Date: 1996-08-27
Institutions: European Parliament, NOVO, RIBEIRO, SIERRA GONZALEZ, STENIUS-KAUKONEN
Subjects: Azores, EU financing, administrative formalities, disabled person, gender equality, terms for aid, vocational training













EUR-Lex - 91996E2322 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2322

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2322/96 by Angela SIERRA GONZÁLEZ , Marjatta STENIUS-KAUKONEN , Honório NOVO , Sérgio RIBEIRO to the Commission. Late payment to trainees  


Official Journal C 365 , 04/12/1996 P. 0109 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2322/96 by Angela Sierra González (GUE/NGL), Marjatta Stenius-Kaukonen (GUE/NGL), Honório Novo (GUE/NGL) and Sérgio Ribeiro (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (27 August 1996)Subject: Late payment to traineesWhile on a visit to the Autonomous Region of the Azores, Portugal, we attempted to obtain information about current or previous Community initiatives in order to gauge their impact. We accordingly travelled to the parish of Rabo de Peixe, on the island of São Miguel, since we knew that activities connected with the NOW and Horizon initiatives had been taking place there.We were greatly impressed by some of the things we saw and found out and have commented or will comment on them on other occasions. Leaving that point aside, however, we were told that a portion of the grants due to trainees had not been paid. Evidence was even produced in the shape of a signed petition, dated May 1996, calling for the payment in question to be made.Is the Commission aware of this situation? What can it do to rectify such unacceptable and inexplicable delays as quickly as is required by the circumstances of the persons concerned?Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (8 October 1996)Requests for final payments in respect of the NOW and Horizon initiatives (1991-93) should have been forwarded by the Portuguese authorities to the Commission on 31 December 1995.As regards the NOW initiative (1991-93), the request for final payment was submitted by the Portuguese authorities on 22 August 1996, but it is incomplete. In a letter sent on 17 September 1996, the Commission drew attention to the missing elements of the dossier.With regard to the Horizon initiative (1991-93), an incomplete request for final payment was submitted on 30 July 1996. This request will not be admissible until all the elements of the dossier have been forwarded. In a letter sent on 11 September 1996, the Commission drew attention to the missing elements of the dossier.Accordingly, the Commission is at present unable to pay to the Portuguese authorities the final balance in respect of these two initiatives.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2299/96 by Richard HOWITT to the Commission. Draft code of practice on the employment of disabled people
Date: 1996-08-27
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 - 91996E2299 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2299

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2299/96 by Richard HOWITT to the Commission. Draft code of practice on the employment of disabled people  


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





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2299/96 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (27 August 1996)Subject: Draft code of practice on the employment of disabled peopleWhen does the Commission intend to publish its draft Code of Practice on the Employment of Disabled People, referred to in the Green Paper on Social Policy in 1994 and still not published in 1996?Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (17 September 1996)The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to his Written Question E-2150/96 ((see page 116. )).