do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2787/96 by Antonio TRIZZA to the Commission. Reform of the common organization of the market in olive oil
Date: 1996-10-21
Institutions: European Parliament, TRIZZA
Subjects: common organisation of markets, designation of origin, olive oil, originating product, product quality, production aid, production quota













EUR-Lex - 91996E2787 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2787

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2787/96 by Antonio TRIZZA to the Commission. Reform of the common organization of the market in olive oil  


Official Journal C 105 , 03/04/1997 P. 0025 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2787/96 by Antonio Trizza (NI) to the Commission (21 October 1996)Subject: Reform of the common organization of the market in olive oilThe EU's proposal for a reform of the COM provides for the introduction of a national quota system involving the payment of production aid on the basis of the number of trees rather than the volume of production, as is presently the case. This would increase the income from land and undermine the modernization process already under way in the sector. The reform should in fact be focused on measures to promote the upgrading of olive oil, in order to enhance its marketability, and a fair income for producers and should certainly not encourage the marketing of blends of olive oil and seed oil, which would adulterate the product to the detriment of quality. This would also conflict with the coming introduction by the EU of the protected designation of origin (PDO) system.Would the Commission not agree that the reform of the COM should be used to upgrade the role of producers' associations, which are able to convey the real needs of olive oil producers, and to follow the path already taken by the Commission with the introduction of the PDO system, which means that olive oil quality standards are also based on geographical considerations?Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (28 November 1996)The Commission will be discussing the different possible options for the reform of the olive oil common market organisation (CMO) in the very near future. A document will be transmitted to the Parliament and the Council for discussion before any concrete proposals are finalised.The Commission cannot pre-empt the outcome of its deliberations by answering specific questions on the options but will certainly take the Honourable Member's questions and remarks into account.It must be clear that the new olive oil common market organisation (CMO) should be simple, more transparent and easier to control than the existing regime. Quality should be at a premium and producers should be targeted as directly as possible. Differences of a regional, social and environmental kind should be taken into account.Producer organisations have played a role in the management of the current market organisation. The kind of role they will play in the future depends very much upon the kind of option chosen for the new regime.The reform of the CMO should not change the current policy on specific origins which is part of the Commission's overall approach to promoting quality and not part of the market regime.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2757/96 by Caroline JACKSON to the Commission. EU Fishing agreements with the Gambia
Date: 1996-10-21
Institutions: European Parliament, JACKSON CAROLINE
Subjects: The Gambia, agreement (EU), fishery resources, fishing agreement, fishing area, fishing regulations, fishing vessel, territorial waters













EUR-Lex - 91996E2757 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2757

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2757/96 by Caroline JACKSON to the Commission. EU Fishing agreements with the Gambia  


Official Journal C 091 , 20/03/1997 P. 0027 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2757/96 by Caroline Jackson (PPE) to the Commission (21 October 1996)Subject: EU Fishing agreements with the GambiaCould the Commission state what steps it has taken to ensure that EU vessels, fishing under fisheries agreements concluded with the Gambian authorities, do not undermine the sustainable development of local communities who depend on fish resources in their coastal waters?Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (29 November 1996)The last protocol to the fisheries agreement with Gambia expired on 30th June 1996. No other protocol has been ratified since. The Gambian authorities cancelled at the last minute their arrival in Brussels and their participation in the formal negotiation which was scheduled on 25th June 1996. From that date there has been no request from Gambia to recommence a negotiation with the Community.In annex to the last protocol paragraph G says that'Community vessels may carry out fishing activities in the following zones:- beyond 7 miles from the coast for trawlers equal or less than 250 gross registered tons (GRT);- beyond 12 miles from the coast for trawlers more than 250 gross registered tons (GRT)'With these fishing zones, Community vessels do not undermine the sustainable development of local communities. Furthermore, in the last protocol, fishing possibilities have been utilised less than 7%. With such a low rate, no harm could have been done to the local communities.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2778/96 by Georges BERTHU to the Commission. IGC: the cost of monetary union
Date: 1996-10-21
Institutions: BERTHU, European Parliament
Subjects: computer systems, euro, financial transaction, investment, job creation, monetary union













EUR-Lex - 91996E2778 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2778

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2778/96 by Georges BERTHU to the Commission. IGC: the cost of monetary union  


Official Journal C 083 , 14/03/1997 P. 0064 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2778/96 by Georges Berthu (I-EDN) to the Commission (21 October 1996)Subject: IGC: the cost of monetary unionThe Commission has published many accounts of the savings which monetary union will bring for both individuals and businesses. However, has it attempted to evaluate the overall costs which this reform might entail?Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission (2 December 1996)The concept of overall costs is difficult to define.However, the changeover to the euro will, it is quite clear, bring substantial savings and necessitate specific investments. These investments will have beneficial effects, notably in terms of business activity and job creation in, for example, the information technology sector.A major investment effort will be required in particular of the banking sector and the distributive trades, although this would have been essential even without economic and monetary union: training of personnel, updating of software in preparation for the year 2000, etc.A number of estimates have been made, but they are impossible to verify and do not capture the associated savings and advantages.As distinct from investment, savings are recurrent. Simply taking into account transaction and exchange-rate costs, they amount to some ECU 30 billion a year in the Community as a whole.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2724/96 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Guarantee fund for the audiovisual sector
Date: 1996-10-21
Institutions: AMADEO, European Parliament
Subjects: EU production, European Investment Fund, audiovisual industry, audiovisual production, film industry, film production, guarantee, small and medium-sized enterprises













EUR-Lex - 91996E2724 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2724

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2724/96 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Guarantee fund for the audiovisual sector  


Official Journal C 091 , 20/03/1997 P. 0026 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2724/96 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (21 October 1996)Subject: Guarantee fund for the audiovisual sectorIn connection with the proposal for a Council Decision establishing a 'European Guarantee Fund to promote cinema and television production' (COM(95) 546) ((OJ C 41, 13.2.1996, p. 8. )), will the Commission clarify the type of producer which is to receive funding and say whether it intends to promote major productions which can compete on world markets against American products, or whether it will favour independent producers and screenwriters, which are the best representatives of European culture and have established their position on the world market in recent decades with masterpieces of unlimited value?Will the Commission favour small and medium-sized production companies by assisting projects which to produce more films, so that any failures can be balanced by successes and the risks can be reduced?Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (27 November 1996)In principle the European Investment Fund will be open to all types of productions provided they are likely to be commercially viable and have a potential for cross-border distribution (i.e. in at least two Member States).As requested by the Council and Parliament, the Commission is examining a mechanism for consideration of projects with limited financial scope, which most often originate in Member States with a limited audiovisual capacity. This mechanism would make it possible for a certain portion of the Fund's finances to be earmarked for this type of project.The Fund is clearly intended to support producers presenting catalogues containing several production projects as well as firms presenting individual projects.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2742/96 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Telecommunications
Date: 1996-10-21
Institutions: AMADEO, European Parliament
Subjects: EC Directive, EC conformity marking, approximation of laws, codification of EU law, telecommunications, telecommunications equipment













EUR-Lex - 91996E2742 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2742

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2742/96 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Telecommunications  


Official Journal C 083 , 14/03/1997 P. 0060 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2742/96 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (21 October 1996)Subject: TelecommunicationsIn connection with the proposal for a European Parliament and Council directive relating to telecommunications terminal equipment and satellite earth station equipment, including the mutual recognition of their conformity (COM(95) 612), in order to make Community law as clear and transparent as possible, the Commission, in its decision of 1 April 1996, decided that its services should officially codify legal acts at the latest after the tenth amendment made to them.Can the Commission ensure that Directive 89/336 ((OJ L 139, 23.5.1989, p. 19. )) on electromagnetic compatibility is adopted as soon as possible, in order to avoid confusion regarding the repeal of Article 10(4), laid down in Article 9(4) of Directive 91/263 ((OJ L 128, 23.5.1991, p. 1. ))?Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (28 November 1996)The provisions of the electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) directive (89/336/EEC) have applied since 1 January 1992. However its wide scope demonstrated the overriding need to provide for a transitional period, so as to ensure a harmonious changeover from the application of systems of a purely national character to an exclusive Community system since the EMC directive is a comprehensive harmonisation directive. On 28 April 1992, the Council adopted Directive 92/31/EEC ((OJ L 126, 12.5.1992. )) to allow a transitional period until 31 December 1995. Therefore the EMC directive came into force on 1 January 1996.A consolidated version of Directive 89/336/EEC, which was amended not only by Directive 92/263/EEC but also by Directives 92/31/EEC, 93/68/EEC ((OJ L 220, 30.8.1993. )) and 93/97/EEC ((OJ L 290, 24.11.1993. )), has not yet been drafted in order not to mislead the European industry with different codes for a legislation that is mandatory only since the beginning of 1996.However, in general terms, the Commission considers that a consolidated version of Directive 89/336/EEC should be available after a sufficient lead time.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2746/96 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Leghold traps
Date: 1996-10-21
Institutions: AMADEO, European Parliament
Subjects: Canada, Russia, United States, framework agreement, fur-bearing animal, hides and furskins industry, hunting regulations, protection of animals, third country













EUR-Lex - 91996E2746 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2746

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2746/96 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Leghold traps  


Official Journal C 072 , 07/03/1997 P. 0077 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2746/96 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (21 October 1996)Subject: Leghold trapsWith reference to the proposal for a Council regulation amending Regulation (EEC) No 3254/91 prohibiting the use of leghold traps in the Community and the introduction into the Community of pelts and manufactured goods of certain wild animal species originating in countries which catch them by means of leghold traps or trapping methods which do not meet international humane trapping standards (COM(95)737 ((OJ C 58, 28.2.1996, p. 17. ))), can the Commission draw up a timetable showing that negotiations with the third countries concerned will be concluded by the end of 1996 or by June 1997 at the latest, and can the committee of experts, which was appointed some time ago, complete its work no later than the same deadline?Joint answer to Written Questions E-2743/96, E-2745/96 and E-2746/96 given by Sir Leon Brittan on behalf of the Commission (27 November 1996)The Commission takes note of the Honourable Member's suggestions, which relate to the current negotiations with Canada, the United States and Russia for a framework agreement on humane trapping methods. In accordance with Article 228 of the Treaty, the Commission is negotiating for the Community on the basis of negotiating directives received from the Council in June, directives which draw heavily on the conclusions set out in the final report delivered by the expert working party on 20 June.The Commission would furthermore point out that it adopted, on 13 December last year, a proposal amending Regulation (EEC) No 3254/91 for transmission to the Council. ((COM(95) 737 final. )) This proposal contains provisions concerning the introduction into the Community of pelts and manufactured goods of certain species, including specific provisions on pelts and products obtained through trapping by indigenous peoples. The proposal also includes a timetable of measures to be taken by the Commission, measures which depend primarily on the progress made in the above negotiations.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2732/96 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Animals in zoos
Date: 1996-10-21
Institutions: AMADEO, European Parliament
Subjects: animal welfare, principle of subsidiarity, protection of animals, zoology













EUR-Lex - 91996E2732 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2732

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2732/96 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Animals in zoos  


Official Journal C 083 , 14/03/1997 P. 0057 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2732/96 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (21 October 1996)Subject: Animals in zoosThe Commission has issued a proposal for a Council Recommendation relating to the keeping of wild animals in zoos (COM(95) 619) to replace its proposal of 31 July 1991 laying down minimum standards for the keeping of animals in zoos, which it has withdrawn for the purposes of applying the principle of subsidiarity.It is deplorable that the Commission has followed the majority line of the Council in withdrawing its proposal for a directive and proposing a recommendation instead. This contradicts the EEC's position in 1991 and flies in the face of the position Parliament adopted at the beginning of 1995 when it called explicitly for the directive to be adopted.A recommendation is not likely to achieve concrete results and there is a danger that conditions in some European zoos will deteriorate further, with the result that the animals will suffer and the public will be at risk. This can only strengthen the section of public opinion which is already calling for all zoos to be closed.Will the Commission therefore resubmit to the Council its proposal for a directive on the keeping of wild animals in zoos?Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (18 November 1996)As indicated in its communication to the Council of 12 December 1995 ((COM(95) 619 final. )), the Commission decided to withdraw its 1991 proposal for a directive on minimum standards for the keeping of animals in zoos in view of the application of the principle of subsidiarity.The Commission, however, agrees with the Honourable Member that the overall situation in zoos in the Community can only be improved if Member States adopt legislation on the subject which is why it has proposed a Council recommendation on the subject.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2728/96 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Structural Funds
Date: 1996-10-21
Institutions: AMADEO, European Parliament
Subjects: EU programme, Italy, Structural Funds, administrative procedure, financial aid













EUR-Lex - 91996E2728 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2728

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2728/96 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Structural Funds  


Official Journal C 083 , 14/03/1997 P. 0057 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2728/96 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (21 October 1996)Subject: Structural FundsThe European Union accuses the Italian regions of incompetence in using the Structural Funds. Italy's local authorities rebut this charge by pointing to the inefficiency of the 'Euro snails' working in Brussels, to wit:the Region of Basilicata sent notification of its plan in 1993. In October 1995, the EU asked for the papers to be resubmitted. After the entire file had been prepared and dispatched for the second time, the EU stated that the documentation should have been sent via the Italian Presidency.Is the Commission aware of the tortuous progress of this application? What stage has the procedure initiated in 1993 now reached? Is it still at a standstill?Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission (5 December 1996)State aid schemes planned under programmes which are part-financed by the Community's Structural Funds must be vetted by the Commission in accordance with Article 92 et seq. of the EC Treaty. Member States must therefore take the necessary steps to notify the Commission, pursuant to Article 93(3) of the Treaty, in sufficient time and in accordance with the procedures laid down for the purpose, of legislative measures providing for assistance of this kind.The notification which was made in 1993 and to which the Honourable Member refers concerned transmission of the multifund operational programme (MOP). Full notification, pursuant to Article 93(3), of the regional laws providing for aid schemes part-financed by the MOP over the period 1994-99 was not given until 3 June 1996.The Commission would also draw the Honourable Members attention to the fact that it received the clarifications requested concerning some of the measures in question only on 3 October 1996. It will adopt a decision on the aid measures that were properly notified in accordance with Article 93(3) of the Treaty within two months of receiving the information.The Commission has also noted that certain aid measures were not properly notified in accordance with Article 93(3). The two-month deadline does not apply in such cases. The measures in question are currently being examined in the light of the competition rules; some of them were the subject of a decision adopted by the Commission on 6 November 1996.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2755/96 by Bernie MALONE to the Commission. Town twinning
Date: 1996-10-21
Institutions: European Parliament, MALONE
Subjects: European integration, exchange of information, financial aid, twinning













EUR-Lex - 91996E2755 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2755

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2755/96 by Bernie MALONE to the Commission. Town twinning  


Official Journal C 083 , 14/03/1997 P. 0063 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2755/96 by Bernie Malone (PSE) to the Commission (21 October 1996)Subject: Town twinningCould the Commission specify precisely the type of activities that satisfy the requirements to have a European element to a town-twinning programme in order to receive financial assistance from the Commission?Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (15 November 1996)The Commission regards town twinning schemes as a valuable way of involving ordinary people and their elected representatives in European integration and of strengthening their sense of belonging to the Community.If a twinning arrangement is to be a success in this sense, the actual exchange schemes need to be organized so that the nature and content of the activities proposed contribute towards fostering a better understanding between those taking part and providing greater knowledge of their social, economic, professional, political and cultural environment. Eligible projects can involve any social or age group (e.g. children, young people, adults), but should demonstrate that they create a genuine European awareness.In fact the scope of possible town-twinning activities which satisfy this criteria is virtually unlimited. Among the following activities which have been judged to provide a European element and have benefitted from a grant in the past are joint discussion of topics such as ways of combating unemployment, protection of the environment, the problems of racism and xenophobia, comparisons of education systems, language teaching, how local administration functions, electoral systems, the integration of disabled people or immigrants into the Community, debates on European policies, the future of Europe (monetary union, enlargement), the role of local authorities in the European integration process, visits to projects funded by the Community, visits to local industries, institutions and other facilities in order to compare them with facilities in the twinned towns and exhibitions of local artists from different twinned towns. Any town-twinning activity which brings together people from more than two towns and two different Member States can already be said to have a European element. This is even more evident if the activity involves a pooling of experience and ideas about a subject where there is a particular need for solidarity and a common commitment to Europe.