do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2953/96 by Jesús CABEZÓN ALONSO , Juan COLINO SALAMANCA to the Commission. Consumption aid for olive oil
Date: 1996-11-08
Institutions: CABEZON ALONSO, COLINO SALAMANCA, European Parliament
Subjects: EU aid, European Commission, consumption, olive oil













EUR-Lex - 91996E2953 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2953

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2953/96 by Jesús CABEZÓN ALONSO , Juan COLINO SALAMANCA to the Commission. Consumption aid for olive oil  


Official Journal C 091 , 20/03/1997 P. 0054 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2953/96 by Jesús Cabezón Alonso (PSE) and Juan Colino Salamanca (PSE) to the Commission (8 November 1996)Subject: Consumption aid for olive oilDoes the Commission intend to modify, reduce, increase or abolish consumption aid for olive oil, which has made it possible for olive oil to compete against other substitute oils?Joint answer to Written Questions E-2953/96, E-2954/96, E-2955/96, E-2956/96, E-2957/96, E-2958/96, E-2959/96, E-2960/96, E-2961/96, E-2962/96 and E-2964/96 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (26 November 1996)The Commission will be discussing the different options for the reform of the olive oil common market organization (CMO) in the very near future. A document will then be transmitted speedily to the Parliament and the Council for discussion before any concrete proposals are finalised.The Commission will certainly take into account the Honourable Members' remarks and questions concerning employment, intervention aid to real production, aid per tree, consumption aid, quality, impact on the environment and the specific problems of Spain and some of its producer regions.It would not be correct to comment in detail at this stage on the various options for reforms except to repeat that the new common market organisation should be transparent, simple, easy to control and should target producers efficiently.The Commission attaches great importance to quality and believes that, whatever option is chosen, there will be an important role for Member States and regions.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2925/96 by John IVERSEN to the Commission. East German energy agreement round of 31 January 1996
Date: 1996-11-08
Institutions: European Parliament, IVERSEN
Subjects: German Democratic Republic, aid to industry, contract, economic support, electrical energy, energy distribution, reduced price, restriction on competition, supply













EUR-Lex - 91996E2925 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2925

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2925/96 by John IVERSEN to the Commission. East German energy agreement round of 31 January 1996  


Official Journal C 083 , 14/03/1997 P. 0050 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2925/96 by John Iversen (PSE) to the Commission (8 November 1996)Subject: East German energy agreement round of 31 January 1996Has the Commission endorsed the East German energy agreement round's decisions of 31 January 1996 between the German Energy Ministry and German energy utilities represented by VEAG and associated companies?If so, why?Joint answer to Written Questions E-2701/96 and E-2925/96 given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission (27 November 1996)According to the German authorities the agreements within the 'Energiekonsensrunde Ost' were reached among the ministers of Economic affairs of the Neue Länder, the federal ministry of Economic affairs, representatives of the East German energy industry and representatives of the lignite industry and its owners on 31 January 1996 in Erfurt. The aim was to secure the electricity supply in the East German Länder in the long run and to promote East Germany as an industrial site. The German authorities emphasized that the agreements were exclusively political declarations without any legal commitments. Neither the German government nor the local governments involved entered any commitments. It was also emphasized that, with regard to the agreements, there do not exist any contracts concerning the companies Veag and Laubag or other companies. Alleged arrangements with the Danish ministry of economics were also denied.However, it was confirmed that Veag intends to offer an annual discount to regional energy distribution companies up to DM 150 millions if electricity beyond their 70% energy demand is purchased from Veag. This discount refers to electricity contracts with a duration of 20 years, agreed in 1990 between the predecessor company of Veag and the regional East German energy suppliers for 70% of their energy demand. Veag's purpose is a better utilisation of its energy plants which are more than 95% lignite-based.Therefore, the Commission is currently investigating whether Veag offers discounts with regard to economic criteria and in compliance with the EC Treaty competition rules.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2973/96 by Florus WIJSENBEEK to the Commission. Discrimination against non-residents by the SNCF
Date: 1996-11-08
Institutions: European Parliament, WIJSENBEEK
Subjects: France, carriage of passengers, discrimination on the basis of nationality, equal treatment, indemnification, public transport, rail transport, ticket













EUR-Lex - 91996E2973 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2973

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2973/96 by Florus WIJSENBEEK to the Commission. Discrimination against non-residents by the SNCF  


Official Journal C 083 , 14/03/1997 P. 0102 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2973/96 by Florus Wijsenbeek (ELDR) to the Commission (8 November 1996)Subject: Discrimination against non-residents by the SNCFIs the Commission aware that (French) train travellers making a domestic journey who arrive at their destination more than 30 minutes later than the time shown in the timetable because of a train delay are paid 80% of the cost of their railway ticket in compensation for the inconvenience?Can the Commission explain why travellers who have purchased their ticket outside France and come from abroad and also arrive later at their destination in France are not eligible for the provisions described above?Does the Commission share my view that this constitutes discrimination against non-residents?If so, in the framework of free movement of residents of the Union, should such a ruling not apply to all travellers on French Railways who arrive too late at their destination, provided that the cause of the delay cannot be proved to be the responsibility of a railway company other than SNCF?Lastly, will the Commission consider making this French provision a European one and submit proposals to this end to the Council?Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission (20 December 1996)The Commission will study the arrangements in France for reimbursing travellers for the late arrival of trains to see whether they involve discrimination by nationality contrary to the EC Treaty.The Commission believes, however, that rules on reimbursement for the late arrival of trains or of other forms of transport should be left to the Member States in the interests of subsidiarity, so long as they respect Community law.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2967/96 by Jesús CABEZÓN ALONSO to the Commission. Use of the Spanish letter 'ñ'
Date: 1996-11-08
Institutions: CABEZON ALONSO, European Parliament
Subjects: Publications Office of the European Union, Spain, official document, official language, printing, word processing













EUR-Lex - 91996E2967 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2967

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2967/96 by Jesús CABEZÓN ALONSO to the Commission. Use of the Spanish letter 'ñ'  


Official Journal C 105 , 03/04/1997 P. 0040 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2967/96 by Jesús Cabezón Alonso (PSE) to the Commission (8 November 1996)Subject: Use of the Spanish letter 'ñ'The letter 'ñ' is one of the letters which make up the alphabet of the Spanish language, one of the official languages of the European Union.All too often, it is forgotten in documents and texts circulated by non-Spanish bodies and institutions in the European Union that 'ñ' is a letter in its own right and should be used as such.The issue is even more serious when it involves the recognition of academic qualifications by non-Spanish universities and institutions and affects citizens whose names include the letter 'ñ'.Will the Commission take steps to prevent the Spanish letter 'ñ' from being forgotten?Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (13 December 1996)The Commission has always paid very close attention to the special characters and signs of the different European languages in its policies regarding word-processing equipment and the presentation of publications.When official texts are published, an inter-institutional committee decides on the conventions and rules of presentation to be observed. These are contained in a Vademecum for Editors circulated to all institutions ((1993 edition, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg. )). The Office for Official Publications of the European Communities ensures that the rules laid down are observed, and places a specific obligation on its suppliers to faithfully reproduce special characters such as the Spanish letter 'ñ'.When it comes to bodies which are not European institutions, the Commission considers that this matter falls outside its field of competence.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2149/96 of 8 November 1996 amending Regulation (EC) No 716/96 adopting exceptional support measures for the beef market in the United Kingdom
Date: 1996-11-08
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: United Kingdom, animal disease, beef, slaughter of animals, veterinary inspection, veterinary legislation













EUR-Lex - 31996R2149 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



31996R2149

Commission Regulation (EC) No 2149/96 of 8 November 1996 amending Regulation (EC) No 716/96 adopting exceptional support measures for the beef market in the United Kingdom  


Official Journal L 288 , 09/11/1996 P. 0014 - 0014 





COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2149/96 of 8 November 1996 amending Regulation (EC) No 716/96 adopting exceptional support measures for the beef market in the United Kingdom THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 805/68 of 27 June 1968 on the common organization of the market in beef and veal (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1997/96 (2), and in particular Article 23 thereof,Whereas Commission Regulation (EC) No 716/96 of 19 April 1996 (3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1974/96 (4), authorizes the purchase of animals over 30 months old and held on holdings in the United Kingdom for at least three months with a view to slaughter and destruction; whereas, following experience gained in the application of the slaughter arrangements in question, the period during which the animals must have been held on holdings must be longer;Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Beef and Veal,HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:Article 1 In Article 1 (1) of Regulation (EC) No 716/96, the period 'three months` is hereby replaced by 'six months`.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 to animals purchased from the third Monday following the date of publication.This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.Done at Brussels, 8 November 1996.For the CommissionFranz FISCHLERMember of the Commission(1) OJ No L 148, 28. 6. 1968, p. 24.(2) OJ No L 267, 19. 10. 1996, p. 1.(3) OJ No L 99, 20. 4. 1996, p. 14.(4) OJ No L 262, 16. 10. 1996, p. 2.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2959/96 by Jesús CABEZÓN ALONSO , Juan COLINO SALAMANCA to the Commission. Abolition of the intervention price in the COM for olive oil
Date: 1996-11-08
Institutions: CABEZON ALONSO, COLINO SALAMANCA, European Parliament
Subjects: Council of the European Union, European Commission, European Parliament, agricultural performance, common organisation of markets, farm income, intervention price, olive oil, proposal (EU)













EUR-Lex - 91996E2959 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2959

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2959/96 by Jesús CABEZÓN ALONSO , Juan COLINO SALAMANCA to the Commission. Abolition of the intervention price in the COM for olive oil  


Official Journal C 091 , 20/03/1997 P. 0055 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2959/96 by Jesús Cabezón Alonso (PSE) and Juan Colino Salamanca (PSE) to the Commission (8 November 1996)Subject: Abolition of the intervention price in the COM for olive oilHas the Commission proposed abolishing the intervention price as part of the reform of the COM for olive oil?Is the Commission aware that such a decision would have a serious direct impact on farmers' incomes?Joint answer to Written Questions E-2953/96, E-2954/96, E-2955/96, E-2956/96, E-2957/96, E-2958/96, E-2959/96, E-2960/96, E-2961/96, E-2962/96 and E-2964/96 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (26 November 1996)The Commission will be discussing the different options for the reform of the olive oil common market organization (CMO) in the very near future. A document will then be transmitted speedily to the Parliament and the Council for discussion before any concrete proposals are finalised.The Commission will certainly take into account the Honourable Members' remarks and questions concerning employment, intervention aid to real production, aid per tree, consumption aid, quality, impact on the environment and the specific problems of Spain and some of its producer regions.It would not be correct to comment in detail at this stage on the various options for reforms except to repeat that the new common market organisation should be transparent, simple, easy to control and should target producers efficiently.The Commission attaches great importance to quality and believes that, whatever option is chosen, there will be an important role for Member States and regions.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2934/96 by Johanna MAIJ-WEGGEN to the Commission. Cooperation between the Dominican Republic and Haiti
Date: 1996-11-08
Institutions: European Parliament, MAIJ-WEGGEN
Subjects: Dominican Republic, EU aid, EU programme, European Development Fund, European Union, Haiti, development policy, economic development, regional policy













EUR-Lex - 91996E2934 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2934

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2934/96 by Johanna MAIJ-WEGGEN to the Commission. Cooperation between the Dominican Republic and Haiti  


Official Journal C 083 , 14/03/1997 P. 0097 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2934/96 by Johanna Maij-Weggen (PPE) to the Commission (8 November 1996)Subject: Cooperation between the Dominican Republic and HaitiHas the Commission taken note of the resolution of the ACP-EU Assembly of 26 September 1996 which referred to the increasing cooperation between the Dominican Republic and Haiti with regard to development projects?What practical initiatives has the Commission taken to encourage this cooperation and what actual cooperation projects are or will be involved?Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission (5 December 1996)The Commission has indeed taken note of the Assembly's resolution of 26 September.Under the Lomé Convention the Commission collaborates with Cariforum, whose membership is made up of the ACP countries in the Caribbean region and which is the central clearing house for all applications for regional cooperation programmes eligible for financial assistance from the European Development Fund (EDF) in the Caribbean region and has a hand in their preparation. Several programmes have already been financed on that basis by the 7th EDF (indicative programme: ECU 105 million). Some have already been approved and put in hand; others are still in the preparatory phase.The two countries referred to are involved, on that basis, in major programmes initiated in sectors supported by the Commission, e.g. a programme to promote trade and economic integration (ECU 14 million); a programme to support inter-university cooperation and improve studies for masters' degrees (ECU 22.4 million); a project to promote and improve the tourist industry (ECU 12.8 million); and a programme of assistance for credit, research, training and diversification in agriculture (ECU 22.4 million). An environmental programme (ECU 11 million) and various minor projects, designed in particular to improve post and communication services in Caribbean countries, are in preparation.A survey for identifying projects to foster social and economic development in the border regions of Haiti and the Dominican Republic is also in preparation as part of regional and (as in this case) bilateral cooperation.A number of cooperation programmes bringing the two countries concerned more closely together should - in principle - still receive financial assistance under both the 7th and 8th EDFs.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2998/96 by Yannos KRANIDIOTIS to the Commission. Statements by the EU representative in Turkey
Date: 1996-11-08
Institutions: European Parliament, KRANIDIOTIS
Subjects: European Community, Türkiye, diplomatic profession, diplomatic representation, human rights













EUR-Lex - 91996E2998 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2998

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2998/96 by Yannos KRANIDIOTIS to the Commission. Statements by the EU representative in Turkey  


Official Journal C 096 , 24/03/1997 P. 0047 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2998/96 by Yannos Kranidiotis (PSE) to the Commission (8 November 1996)Subject: Statements by the EU representative in TurkeyFrom his statements to the Turkish and European press, it would appear that Mr M Lake, the EU representative in Turkey, is failing to take account of the policies and positions adopted by the Community institutions with regard to Turkey. He appears to be - intentionally or unintentionally - disregarding all violations of human rights by Turkey, creating the impression that he is Turkey's Ambassador to the EU rather than the EU's representative in Turkey.What is the Commission's reaction to this? For how long has Mr Lake occupied his present post as EU representative in Turkey, and when will he be transferred?Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (20 December 1996)Since taking up his appointment, the Commission's representative in Turkey has always faithfully expressed the Commission's views. He has, furthermore, consistently paid close attention to and reported on the work of the other Community institutions, notably Parliament.The Commission has full confidence in its representative in Turkey.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2945/96 by Mary BANOTTI to the Commission. Application of the directive on the use of standards for the transmission of television signals
Date: 1996-11-08
Institutions: BANOTTI, European Parliament
Subjects: European audiovisual area, European standard, application of EU law, cable distribution, harmonisation of standards, high-definition television, infringement procedure (EU), national implementing measure, satellite communications













EUR-Lex - 91996E2945 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2945

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2945/96 by Mary BANOTTI to the Commission. Application of the directive on the use of standards for the transmission of television signals  


Official Journal C 091 , 20/03/1997 P. 0054 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2945/96 by Mary Banotti (PPE) to the Commission (8 November 1996)Subject: Application of the directive on the use of standards for the transmission of television signalsThe Commission will be aware of the concern expressed by Parliament in July 1995 during the second reading of Directive 95/47/EC ((OJ L 281, 23.11.1995, p. 51. )) about the dangers of abuse of a dominant position by 'gatekeepers' (the providers of conditional access and subscriber management systems) and that Articles 4 and 6 of the directive were amended accordingly.What measures has the Commission taken to ensure that this directive has been implemented fully and in similar fashion throughout the Member States?Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (28 November 1996)To date the Commission has not received official communication from any Member State of the national measures implementing this Directive which were due at the latest by 23 August 1996. As is normal in such circumstances, the Commission is opening infringement procedure for non-communication under Article 169 of the EC Treaty. Once Member States' communications have been received the Commission will check the transposition for conformity with the Directive.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2978/96 by Pietro DI PRIMA to the Commission. Illegal immigration at Lampedusa
Date: 1996-11-08
Institutions: DI PRIMA, European Parliament
Subjects: European convention, Italy, competence of the Member States, external border of the EU, illegal migration, immigration, island, national law, public safety













EUR-Lex - 91996E2978 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2978

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2978/96 by Pietro DI PRIMA to the Commission. Illegal immigration at Lampedusa  


Official Journal C 096 , 24/03/1997 P. 0042 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2978/96 by Pietro Di Prima (UPE) to the Commission (8 November 1996)Subject: Illegal immigration at LampedusaLampedusa, Italy's southernmost island, is now considered the Achilles heel of Europe. More than three thousand non-Community nationals have landed there illegally in one year. All have been registered, put on ships bound for Porto Empedocle and given travel documents. In Lampedusa, which has a local population of 5,500, the non-Community nationals have created many problems: brawls, threats and even attacks on public officials. The people of the island are rightly protesting to the Italian Government, feel themselves abandoned, unprotected and are threatening a strike to stop all activity on the island. Furthermore, the non-Community nationals are also subjected to inhuman treatment, since at great cost they are crammed on boats which are barely afloat, and some drown during the voyage. This is the result of the Martelli law, an obsolete law in Italy which should already have adapted to Schengen.Does the Commission not think it should intervene to:1. Call on Italy to amend the Martelli law immediately?2. Call on the competent Italian authorities to patrol the borders to curb this illegal immigration?Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission (2 December 1996)1. Domestic political debate on the reform of national legislation in the field of immigration is a matter for the Member States. Preparatory work has begun in Italy on a reform of the immigration laws. The Commission is aware of the importance of combating illegal immigration and the networks it uses, which calls for effective controls at the Member States' external borders. Consequently, since the entry into force of the Treaty on European Union, which provides for these subjects to be regarded henceforth by the Member States as matters of common interest (Article K.1(2) and (3)), several decisions have been adopted on admission and deportation. These are not mandatory instruments, but they mark the beginnings of a common response.2. As regards movements across the external borders of the Member States and the exercise of border controls, in 1993 the Commission presented to the Council a draft Convention ((OJ C 11, 15.1.1994. )) proposing common rules. Unfortunately, although the European Council has made a great many statements (most recently in Florence in June 1996), it still has not reached an agreement on this draft. As a result, controls are carried out in accordance with national rules or international agreements linking two or more Member States.