do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2906/96 by Klaus REHDER to the Commission. Cultivation and import of maize and soya beans
Date: 1996-10-31
Institutions: European Parliament, REHDER
Subjects: EU Member State, United States, crop production, import, soya bean, statistics, trade volume













EUR-Lex - 91996E2906 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2906

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2906/96 by Klaus REHDER to the Commission. Cultivation and import of maize and soya beans  


Official Journal C 011 , 13/01/1997 P. 0114 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2906/96 by Klaus Rehder (PSE) to the Commission (31 October 1996)Subject: Cultivation and import of maize and soya beans1. What developments have there been in the cultivation of maize and soya beans in the individual countries of the European Union in the last five years?2. What has been the volume of maize and soya bean imports from the USA into the individual Member States over the last five years?Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (20 November 1996)Because of the length of the answer, which includes a number of tables, the Commission is sending it direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2874/96 by Hiltrud BREYER to the Commission. Thermie 1993
Date: 1996-10-31
Institutions: BREYER, European Parliament
Subjects: European Court of Auditors, budgetary control, carry-over of appropriations, distribution of aid, energy technology, fuel, hydrocarbon, renewable energy, research project, short-term monetary support













EUR-Lex - 91996E2874 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2874

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2874/96 by Hiltrud BREYER to the Commission. Thermie 1993  


Official Journal C 105 , 03/04/1997 P. 0030 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2874/96 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission (31 October 1996)Subject: Thermie 1993Follow-up question on the answer of 29 April 1996 to E-0627/96 ((OJ C 217, 26.7.1996, p. 81. )).1. Are the opinions of the committee on the Commission's draft of the measures to be taken final and exclusive,or can it be assumed that projects on the reserve list will continue to be included in the selection procedure where circumstances change (e.g. where funding is still available or where supported projects are not implemented and there would therefore be refunds)?2. Is it still possible to support projects on the 1993 reserve list from sums repaid or sums not paid out in respect of approved projects for 1993 which will no longer be implemented or only in part, or which have not been implemented at all?3. How long do funds for approved projects from 1993 remain available?Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission (7 January 1997)1. The committee's opinions are not final since the Commission may choose not to comply with them. If this is the case, however, the matter in question is referred to the Council for a decision. Article 2 of the Commission Decision of 19 July 1993 provides for the possibility of granting financial support to projects on the reserve list, if appropriations become available as a result of some of the projects on the priority list being abandoned before 31 December in the financial year concerned.2. The reserve list in the Decision of 19 July 1993 expired on 31 December 1993. The appropriations not spent in respect of approved projects from 1993 cannot be used for other projects in a different budget year and are returned to the general budget.3. Appropriations for approved projects from 1993 remain available throughout the period specified in the work programme for the project in the contract, and authorization is given for their use as the project advances. The exact dates are given in the commitment document.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2909/96 by Tony CUNNINGHAM to the Commission. EU-wide comparative study on causes of road death
Date: 1996-10-31
Institutions: CUNNINGHAM, European Parliament
Subjects: EU statistics, comparative study, database, mortality, motor car, road safety, road transport, transport accident













EUR-Lex - 91996E2909 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2909

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2909/96 by Tony CUNNINGHAM to the Commission. EU-wide comparative study on causes of road death  


Official Journal C 072 , 07/03/1997 P. 0085 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2909/96 by Tony Cunningham (PSE) to the Commission (31 October 1996)Subject: EU-wide comparative study on causes of road deathIt has come to my notice that there is very limited information concerning the extent and cause of road casualties in the European Union. In the interests of improving European transport safety, has the Commission any intention of conducting a European-wide comparative study on the frequency and types of road accidents involving vehicle drivers and pedestrians?Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission (27 November 1996)The Honourable Member is correct to say that statistical information on road accidents in the Community is limited. For this reason, the Commission submitted to the Council on 23 July 1993 a proposal for a decision aiming to establish a Community data base on road accident statistics. In its decision of 30 November 1993 (93/704/EEC) ((OJ L 329, 30.12.1993. )), the Council supported the creation of this data base, known as Care.Currently, the Care project is in a development and validation phase and will be the subject of an interim report to be submitted to the Council in 1997. In the long term, Care will enable the Commission to undertake comparative studies on a Community level on road traffic injuries, which will improve knowledge of road safety in Europe.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2911/96 by Salvador GARRIGA POLLEDO to the Commission. EDF
Date: 1996-10-31
Institutions: European Parliament, GARRIGA POLLEDO
Subjects: EU aid, European Commission, European Development Fund, Member States' contribution, exchange of information, financing, fourth Lomé Convention, inclusion in the budget, intergovernmental conference (EU)













EUR-Lex - 91996E2911 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2911

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2911/96 by Salvador GARRIGA POLLEDO to the Commission. EDF  


Official Journal C 083 , 14/03/1997 P. 0088 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2911/96 by Salvador Garriga Polledo (PPE) to the Commission (31 October 1996)Subject: EDFDoes the Commission intend to request the budgetization of the EDF (incorporation into the Community budget) before the revision of the financial perspectives in 1999?Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission (22 November 1996)On a regular basis since 1973, the Commission has proposed budgetization of the European Development Fund (EDF); it last did so on 8 April 1994, when it transmitted a report to the budgetary authorities on arrangements and possibilities for budgetizing the EDF. ((SEC (94) 640. )) At a meeting on 19 and 20 December that year, the Council advised against amending regulations then in force for EDF financing.The 8th European Development Fund will enter into force when the signatory countries ratify the agreement amending the Lomé IV Convention, according to procedures laid down. The 8th EDF will expire - along with the Convention - on 1 March 2000. Member States have already endorsed the internal agreement on the financing and administration of Community aid and the 8th EDF Financial Regulation should shortly be submitted to the Council.Although the Commission would like budgetization in time for the 8th EDF, such a change will not be possible until amendment of the EC Treaty, given the annexed Declaration No 12 stating that 'the European Development Fund will continue to be financed by national contributions in accordance with the current provisions'.Member States are, however, welcome to discuss the issue under the auspices of the Intergovernmental Conference; should the issue arise, the Commission will willingly deliver its opinion.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2104/96 of 31 October 1996 amending Regulation (EEC) No 2026/92 on detailed rules for the application of the specific supply measures for Madeira as regards olive oil and establishing the forecast supply balance
Date: 1996-10-31
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU aid, Madeira, import licence, olive oil, supply, supply balance sheet













EUR-Lex - 31996R2104 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



31996R2104

Commission Regulation (EC) No 2104/96 of 31 October 1996 amending Regulation (EEC) No 2026/92 on detailed rules for the application of the specific supply measures for Madeira as regards olive oil and establishing the forecast supply balance  


Official Journal L 282 , 01/11/1996 P. 0048 - 0049 





COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2104/96 of 31 October 1996 amending Regulation (EEC) No 2026/92 on detailed rules for the application of the specific supply measures for Madeira as regards olive oil and establishing the forecast supply balanceTHE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1600/92 of 15 June 1992 concerning specific measures for the Azores and Madeira relating to certain agricultural products (1), as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2537/95 (2), and in particular Article 10 thereof,Whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2026/92 (3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2545/95 (4), fixes the forecast supply balance for olive oil for Madeira for the period 1 November 1995 to 31 October 1996; whereas, in order to permit supplies of olive oil to be made to Madeira during the 1996/97 marketing year, a forecast supply balance must be established for the period 1 November 1996 to 31 October 1997;Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Oils and Fats,HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:Article 1 Regulation (EEC) No 2026/92 is hereby amended as follows:1. In the first subparagraph of Article 1 (1), '1 November 1995 to 31 October 1996` is replaced by '1 November 1996 to 31 October 1997`.2. The Annex is replaced by the Annex hereto.Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.It shall apply from 1 November 1996.This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.Done at Brussels, 31 October 1996.For the CommissionFranz FISCHLERMember of the Commission(1) OJ No L 173, 27. 6. 1992, p. 1.(2) OJ No L 260, 31. 10. 1995, p. 10.(3) OJ No L 207, 23. 7. 1992, p. 18.(4) OJ No L 260, 31. 10. 1995, p. 43.ANNEX Forecast supply balance for olive oil for Madeira for the period 1 November 1996 to 31 October 1997 >TABLE>
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2871/96 by Hiltrud BREYER to the Commission. Thermie 1993
Date: 1996-10-31
Institutions: BREYER, European Parliament
Subjects: EU financing, carry-over of appropriations, closing of accounts, distribution of aid, energy technology, energy use, fuel, project evaluation, renewable energy, research project













EUR-Lex - 91996E2871 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2871

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2871/96 by Hiltrud BREYER to the Commission. Thermie 1993  


Official Journal C 096 , 24/03/1997 P. 0028 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2871/96 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission (31 October 1996)Subject: Thermie 1993Follow-up question on point 6 of the answer of 29 April 1996 to E-0627/96 ((OJ C 217, 26.7.1996, p. 81. )).Since the Commission's decision no longer conforms to the opinion of the committee because of the inclusion of three projects from the reserve list and three further programmes not on the reserve list, under Article 10(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 2008/90 ((OJ L 185, 17.7.1990, p. 1. )) the Council has to be informed and may take a different decision.1. Has this been done?2. What does the Council decision say?3. When and where was this decision published?4. To what areas (BM, BU, EI, IN, TR, OG, SE, SF or WE) do the three projects from the reserve list and three other programmes not on the reserve list supported by Commission decision of 13 December 1993 belong?Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission (7 January 1997)1. - 3. The two Commission Decisions to which the Honourable Member refers were taken with the backing of the Thermie committee. The matter was not therefore referred to the Council.4. The Decision of 13 December 1993 does not include any projects from the reserve list annexed to the Decision of 19 July 1993. The three projects, which are on the priority list in the Decision of 19 July 1993, relate to solar energy and qualified for further financial support following a mistake made when the first Decision was published. The three remaining projects are in the field of solid fuels, for which a certain sum had been set aside, with the committee's agreement, following the call for proposals of 22 June 1993. ((OJ C 171, 22.6.1993. ))
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2902/96 by Gianni TAMINO to the Commission. Food poisoning from eating veal in Italy
Date: 1996-10-31
Institutions: European Parliament, TAMINO
Subjects: Italy, consumer protection, food poisoning, health control, hormone, public health, veal, veterinary drug, veterinary inspection













EUR-Lex - 91996E2902 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2902

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2902/96 by Gianni TAMINO to the Commission. Food poisoning from eating veal in Italy  


Official Journal C 096 , 24/03/1997 P. 0034 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2902/96 by Gianni Tamino (V) to the Commission (31 October 1996)Subject: Food poisoning from eating veal in ItalyMore than 60 people were poisoned in recent weeks in Campania, Italy, after eating calf's liver. Investigations by the Higher Institute of Health throughout September confirmed the presence in the liver of clenbuterol, a â2-antagonist substance, or one of the more dangerous substances illegally given to calves only a few months old to promote growth and thus make them more profitable.Is the Commission aware of this and was it informed by the Italian minister for Health?Does it endorse the behaviour of the Minister of Health who kept quiet about everything and does not seem to have investigated butcher's shops throughout Italy?Is it aware that in 1995 alone Piedmont certified that 57% of the infected meat seized was veal?What will it do to protect consumers?Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (29 November 1996)The Commission has been informed by the Italian Health Ministry of the matters referred to by the Honourable Member.Details of the investigations by the Italian authorities will be given to the Commission later once the judicial inquiry now under way has been completed. The Commission has been kept informed, however, of a number of immediately applicable measures taken by the Italian authorities, namely the isolation of suspect animals and an epidemiological investigation on farms from which animals came which tested positive for residues; the suspension of Community approval for the slaughterhouse in question; the implementation of the procedure for withdrawing authorization for the marketing of Ventipulmin, a veterinary medicinal product containing clenbuterol intended for cattle and the tightening of the checks provided for as part of the national plan on monitoring for residues under Council Directive 86/469/EEC concerning the examination of animals and fresh meat for the presence of residues ((OJ L 275, 26.9.1986. )).The Commission is not aware of the percentage of meat seized in Piedmont in 1995.Council Directive 96/23/EC on measures to monitor certain substances and residues thereof in live animals and animal products ((OJ L 125, 23.5.1996. )) should make it possible for the Member States to ensure that consumers are given better protection, in particular where veterinary medicinal products are used unlawfully or banned substances are administered. In addition, the Commission reserves the right, where necessary, to carry out on-the-spot inspections to the extent that its limited staff resources allow.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2870/96 by Hiltrud BREYER to the Commission. Thermie 1993
Date: 1996-10-31
Institutions: BREYER, European Parliament
Subjects: EU financing, carry-over of appropriations, closing of accounts, distribution of aid, energy technology, energy use, fuel, project evaluation, renewable energy, research project













EUR-Lex - 91996E2870 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2870

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2870/96 by Hiltrud BREYER to the Commission. Thermie 1993  


Official Journal C 096 , 24/03/1997 P. 0027 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2870/96 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission (31 October 1996)Subject: Thermie 1993Follow-up question on point 6 of the answer of 29 April 1996 to E-0627/96 ((OJ C 217, 26.7.1996, p.81. )).1. Why was the list of 19 July 1993 approved by the committee and the Commission abandoned and replaced and/or amended by the Commission decision of 13 December 1993?2. Why has there been no funding for the other projects on the reserve list in accordance with the committee's opinion, efforts being made instead to secure a fundamentally new decision in respect of three projects not on the reserve list?Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission (7 January 1997)1. Thermie projects were selected in 1993 following two calls for proposals. ((OJ C 179, 16.7.1992; OJ C 171, 22.6.1993. ))The call of 16 July 1992 was a general call for innovatory and dissemination projects in all the fields of application, as described in Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 2008/90 (the Thermie Regulation), ((OJ L 185, 17.7.1990. )) while the call for proposals of 22 June 1993 concerned solid fuels, pursuant to Article 4 of the same Regulation, which relates to targeted projects.The Decision of 19 July 1993 was not therefore abandoned, nor was it replaced or amended by that of 13 December 1993, since the latter supplemented the former.2. The second Decision, concerning the second call for proposals (see above), covered targeted projects in the field of solid fuels. It also allowed the financial support granted for three solar energy projects to be adjusted, but did not cover any of the projects on the reserve list annexed to the Decision of 19 July 1993.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2893/96 by David BOWE to the Commission. Control of hormones in meat
Date: 1996-10-31
Institutions: BOWE, European Parliament
Subjects: United Kingdom, animal product, health control, hormone, import, meat, meat product, third country, veterinary inspection













EUR-Lex - 91996E2893 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2893

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2893/96 by David BOWE to the Commission. Control of hormones in meat  


Official Journal C 096 , 24/03/1997 P. 0032 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2893/96 by David Bowe (PSE) to the Commission (31 October 1996)Subject: Control of hormones in meatWhat plans does the Commission have to resolve the difficulties which UK Port Health Authorities have experienced, due to their new responsibility, under Directive 90/675/EEC ((OJ L 373, 31.12.1990, p. 1. )), to check 1% of all imported meat and meat products for banned growth promotion substances?Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (2 December 1996)The UK authorities have not informed the Commission about the difficulties to which the Honourable Member alludes. The question appears to refer to the transitional measures to facilitate the changeover to the new veterinary checks under Council Directive 90/675/EEC laying down the principles governing the organization of veterinary checks on products entering the Community from third countries ((OJ L 373, 31.12.1990. )). These checks are detailed in Commission Decision 96/105/EC ((OJ L 24, 31.1.1996. )) of 29 January 1996. This Decision will apply until 1 January 1997. From that date, Commission Decision 94/360/EC ((OJ L 158, 25.6.1994. )) on the reduced frequency of physical checks of consignments of certain products to be imported from third countries under Council Directive 90/675/EEC will apply. This latter Decision will be reviewed by the Commission and the Council when the time comes.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2901/96 by Gianni TAMINO to the Commission. European Court of Justice judgment of 26 September 1996
Date: 1996-10-31
Institutions: European Parliament, TAMINO
Subjects: Italy, cadmium, case-law (EU), infringement procedure (EU), interpretation of the law, judgment of the Court (EU), national implementing measure, water pollution













EUR-Lex - 91996E2901 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2901

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2901/96 by Gianni TAMINO to the Commission. European Court of Justice judgment of 26 September 1996  


Official Journal C 083 , 14/03/1997 P. 0086 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2901/96 by Gianni Tamino (V) to the Commission (31 October 1996)Subject: European Court of Justice judgment of 26 September 1996The Commission will be aware of the case discussed by the European Court of Justice on 26 September 1996 in which the Vicenze (Italy) district magistrate's court sought a preliminary ruling on the interpretation of Directives 76/464/EEC ((OJ L 129, 18.5.1976, p. 23. )) and 83/513/EEC ((OJ L 291, 24.10.1983, p. 1. )) on pollution caused by cadmium discharged into the aquatic environment and their proper transposition in decree law 133/92.Does the Commission not think that the judgment, albeit correct, can be used so as to encourage behaviour inappropriate to Community standards?What will the Commission do to ensure that Directive 76/464, particularly Article 3, and Directive 83/513 are properly implemented under Italian legislation since decree law 133/92 does not require prior authorization for any discharge of cadmium into the aquatic environment?Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (9 December 1996)In the judgement referred to by the Honourable Member the Court of Justice stated that Article 3 of Directive 76/464/EEC must be interpreted as requiring all discharges of cadmium, regardless of the entry date arising from its establishment of origin, to be subject to prior authorization.As far as the possibility is concerned of a public authority in a Member State which has not transposed Article 3 as referred to above invoking that article against an individual person, the Court's judgment confirms the previous case law. Indeed, a Member State may not derive benefit from its own ignorance of Community law nor may any directive in itself and independently of the national transposition laws applied in order to implement this, determine or increase the penal responsibility of those who infringe the provisions of a directive which has not been transposed into national law. These are well established legal principles. It is to be stressed that an infringement procedure is in progress. It was brought by the Commission against Italy as a result of poor transposition of the directives in question with regard to, inter alia, the Article 3 referred to above.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2869/96 by Hiltrud BREYER to the Commission. Thermie 1993
Date: 1996-10-31
Institutions: BREYER, European Parliament
Subjects: European Court of Auditors, aid system, energy technology, research project, supervisory power, use of aid













EUR-Lex - 91996E2869 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2869

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2869/96 by Hiltrud BREYER to the Commission. Thermie 1993  


Official Journal C 091 , 20/03/1997 P. 0046 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2869/96 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission (31 October 1996)Subject: Thermie 1993Follow-up question on point 5 of the answer of 29 April 1996 to E-0627/96 ((OJ C 217, 26.7.1996, p. 81. )).1. When will the Court of Auditors be verifying the 1993 Thermie operations?2. Who is entitled to request an immediate audit?Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission (7 January 1997)The Commission is not in a position to answer the Honourable Member's question, since the matter is not within its field of competence but that of the Court of Auditors, which itself decides when it wishes to carry out audits.