do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 647/97 by Konrad SCHWAIGER , Jan SONNEVELD to the Commission. Absence of EU and ACP bananas from the German and Scandinavian markets
Date: 1997-03-06
Institutions: European Parliament, SCHWAIGER, SONNEVELD
Subjects: ACP countries, Germany, Northern Europe, common organisation of markets, market, marketing, tropical fruit













EUR-Lex - 91997E0647 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E0647

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 647/97 by Konrad SCHWAIGER , Jan SONNEVELD to the Commission. Absence of EU and ACP bananas from the German and Scandinavian markets  


Official Journal C 319 , 18/10/1997 P. 0147 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0647/97 by Konrad Schwaiger (PPE) and Jan Sonneveld (PPE) to the Commission (6 March 1997)Subject: Absence of EU and ACP bananas from the German and Scandinavian marketsThe organization of the market in bananas deals with their marketing throughout the Community, irrespective of country of origin. It is striking that few if any bananas from EU or ACP countries are offered for sale on the German and Scandinavian markets.1. Can the Commission confirm that EU and ACP bananas do not reach the German and Scandinavian markets?2. Why is the EU market in bananas functioning so badly?3. Are existing legal instruments capable of remedying this situation or will the Commission create other incentives in order to attain this goal as soon as possible?Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (9 April 1997)Since the adoption in July 1993 of the common organization of the market, bananas of various origins are available on what has now become a Community-wide market.1. Thus, bananas from Community regions and from African, Caribbean and Pacific countries (the ACP States) are regularly marketed in Germany and occasionally on the Scandinavian markets, Denmark in particular.2. Before the common organization of the market was introduced, national markets were segregated. Community and ACP bananas were mostly marketed on their traditional markets. Furthermore, before the three new Member States acceded to the Community, they did not import bananas from the Community's producer regions or from the ACP states. One cannot conclude that the common organization of the market in bananas is functioning badly three years after its introduction. Breaking down the barriers between the markets is a gradual process, involving the establishment of new commercial partnerships and long-term contracts.3. The Commission feels that it is inappropriate to introduce other legislative measures to increase integration of the markets, which relies on partnerships between those trading in bananas of various origins.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 640/97 by Roberta ANGELILLI to the Commission. Training courses funded by the European Social Fund in the Region of Lazio
Date: 1997-03-06
Institutions: ANGELILLI, European Parliament
Subjects: European Social Fund, Italy, award of contract, fraud, operational programme, organisation, vocational training













EUR-Lex - 91997E0640 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E0640

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 640/97 by Roberta ANGELILLI to the Commission. Training courses funded by the European Social Fund in the Region of Lazio  


Official Journal C 319 , 18/10/1997 P. 0144 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0640/97 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission (6 March 1997)Subject: Training courses funded by the European Social Fund in the Region of LazioFollowing the call for tenders issued in 1996, the Region of Lazio published the results, during the second half of January 1997, of its selection procedure for professional training projects, specifically those submitted for the regional Operational Programmes covered by Objectives 3 and 4.The results were as follows:- 52 projects, to a value of more than LIT 5 billion, were awarded to the ACLI ENAIP - the National Association for Vocational Education and Training run by the Italian Christian Workers' Association; the ENAIP is in severe financial difficulties and would not appear to be in a position to guarantee that the courses will take place;- LIT 700 million were awarded to the UIL ENFAP - the National Association for Vocational Training and Education run by the Italian Labour Union - and more than LIT 1 billion were awarded to the Alto Lazio Consortium; both of these are the subject of legal proceedings brought by the Civitavecchia magistrature, which has taken some of the leaders of these organizations to court on charges of defrauding the Region of Lazio as a result of irregularities in the organization of previous courses.Does the Commission not agree that the organizations which have been awarded the contracts for the courses should be able to guarantee that the projects will actually be carried out? This is not so in the case of the ACLI Association, which is widely known to be in serious financial difficulties which would appear to prejudice its chances of implementing the projects.What is the Commission's position on the allocation of funding to associations which are the subject of legal proceedings for defrauding the region?Finally, what is the Commission's opinion regarding the need to reform the regional regulations governing vocational training in order to ensure that such cases do not arise in future?Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (22 April 1997)The Commission has asked the Member State concerned for information regarding the facts raised to by the Honourable Member. It will inform her of its findings.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 659/97 by Anita POLLACK to the Commission. Use of ECVAM budget
Date: 1997-03-06
Institutions: European Parliament, POLLACK
Subjects: Community budget, European Commission, European official, administrative expenditure, animal experimentation, exchange of information, protection of animals













EUR-Lex - 91997E0659 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E0659

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 659/97 by Anita POLLACK to the Commission. Use of ECVAM budget  


Official Journal C 319 , 18/10/1997 P. 0150 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0659/97 by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission (6 March 1997)Subject: Use of ECVAM budgetWould the Commission confirm that the failure to organize a meeting of national competent authorities between 1994 and September 1996 was directly due to staffing and budgetary problems within the Commission? If so what if any steps have been taken by the Commission to redress this failure? In particular what budget and how many staff posts (as full time equivalents) are specifically allocated by the Commission for (a) meetings of national competent authorities and (b) to monitor implementation and compliance with Directive86/609/EEC ((OJ L 358, 18.12.1986, p. 1. ))? What proportion of the budget allocated for these purposes is not actually being spent at present on these specific purposes?Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (25 April 1997)The Commission invites the Honourable Member to refer to the answers it gave to her Written Questions E-713/96 ((OJ C 183, 24. 6.1996. )) and E-1500/96 ((OJ C 345, 15.11.1996. )).The Commission can confirm that two competent authority meetings for Directive 86/609/EEC for the protection of laboratory animals have been envisaged for 1997 in addition to a working group meeting which already took place in February 1997.Concerning the budget, the Commission would like to draw attention to two points. Firstly, the reference to the budget of the European centre for the validation of alternative methods (ECVAM) in the subject heading is not relevant as regards the competent authority meetings organized by the Commission for Directive 86/609. Secondly, the Commission has a global budget for meetings in general and thus no specific allocations are made for individual competent authority or any other committee meetings.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 646/97 by Elisabeth SCHROEDTER to the Commission. Investment grant from the Government of the Land of Brandenburg for a motor racing track
Date: 1997-03-06
Institutions: European Parliament, SCHROEDTER
Subjects: Brandenburg, European Regional Development Fund, Structural Funds, economic infrastructure, economic support, financing plan, fund (EU), job creation













EUR-Lex - 91997E0646 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E0646

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 646/97 by Elisabeth SCHROEDTER to the Commission. Investment grant from the Government of the Land of Brandenburg for a motor racing track  


Official Journal C 319 , 18/10/1997 P. 0146 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0646/97 by Elisabeth Schroedter (V) to the Commission (6 March 1997)Subject: Investment grant from the Government of the Land of Brandenburg for a motor racing track1. Is the Commission aware that the Government of the Land of Brandenburg is providing a subsidy of DM 241.6 million - 90% of the subsidizable amount - using 50% ERDF Structural Fund appropriations, for the infrastructure for a motor racing track and ancillary facilities, such as a test track, although the Government itself forecasts that it will create only 330 jobs when in use, while serious comparisons with existing motor sport facilities, as well as the plans of the investor in the ancillary facilities, suggest that only 130 permanent jobs will actually be created?2. Is such a large investment grant compatible with the indicator of the CSF (ECU 60 000 per new job created for Objectives 1 and 2)? If not, to what extent is the Commission able and willing to bring its influence to bear in accordance with legal provisions with a view to countering such a disregard for the fundamental principles and objectives of the Structural Funds?3. Is the Commission aware that there is no need for an investment of this size and nature, and that two similar existing establishments are liable to lose business as a result?Should Structural Fund resources which are intended to assist disadvantaged areas be used to promote this kind of subsidy shopping?If not, what will the Commission do to stop it?4. Is the Commission aware that, in order to subsidize this project, the Land Government is withholding subsidy funds, contrary to the rules, from local infrastructure investment in the field of environmental protection, vocational training, further training and retraining establishments and service centres to promote SMEs?Will the Commission accept this way of administering subsidies?Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (8 April 1997)The Land of Brandenburg has informed the Commission that the application for European regional development fund support for the project in question has been withdrawn.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 687/97 by Gerardo FERNÁNDEZ-ALBOR to the Commission. Promoting research in the Community citrus fruits sector
Date: 1997-03-06
Institutions: European Parliament, FERNANDEZ ALBOR
Subjects: EU production, action programme, citrus fruit, common organisation of markets, competitiveness, producer organisation, product quality, production improvement, research policy, third country













EUR-Lex - 91997E0687 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E0687

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 687/97 by Gerardo FERNÁNDEZ-ALBOR to the Commission. Promoting research in the Community citrus fruits sector  


Official Journal C 319 , 18/10/1997 P. 0159 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0687/97 by Gerardo Fernández-Albor (PPE) to the Commission (6 March 1997)Subject: Promoting research in the Community citrus fruits sectorThe citrus fruits sector is one of the most lucrative areas of the agricultural economy in the southern flank of the Community, with large-scale production, much of which is exported to the centre and north of the European Union.However, experts are particularly concerned that citrus fruits grown in other parts of the world are benefiting from intensive, large-scale research which has led to a noticeable improvement in production in non-EU countries. The improved quality of such production resulting from that research could eventually pose a threat to the Community citrus fruits sector.Does the Commission therefore consider that it should promote research in the Community citrus fruits sector in order to restore and improve the quality of our products so that they are not threatened by the successes achieved in research into citrus fruit-growing in other regions of the world, in particular the American continent?Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (17 April 1997)The Commission is aware of the increase in citrus fruit imports from South America and other parts of the world. Community products, citrus fruit in particular, have to compete with the rest of the world. This is one of the reasons why the Commission proposed reform of the common market organization for fruit and vegetables.Under the reform producer organizations may set up an operational fund - 50% financed by the Community - enabling them to implement operational programmes embracing production research and improvement, product quality improvement and promotion. The Commission has recently adopted detailed rules on implementation of these measures.As far as programmes of fundamental and applied research in agriculture are concerned, the Commission finances scientific, pilot and demonstration projects aimed at quality improvement, plant protection and environment-linked production improvement. There is however no specific sectoral strategy.At the present time the Commission is also as part of its agricultural promotion measures putting into place specific promotion measures that include citrus fruit.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 651/97 by Manuela FRUTOS GAMA to the Commission. COM for tobacco
Date: 1997-03-06
Institutions: European Parliament, FRUTOS GAMA
Subjects: Spain, agricultural guidance, common organisation of markets, product quality, production quota, tobacco













EUR-Lex - 91997E0651 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E0651

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 651/97 by Manuela FRUTOS GAMA to the Commission. COM for tobacco  


Official Journal C 367 , 04/12/1997 P. 0034 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0651/97 by Manuela Frutos Gama (PSE) to the Commission (6 March 1997)Subject: COM for tobaccoThe new COM for tobacco currently under discussion involves two significant changes to the previous system.The first is the introduction of a new production premium, 40% of which is to be paid according to product quality. The second is the purchasing of quotas in order to remove them from production.In large areas of my own region of Extremadura, tobacco is the sole crop cultivated. Around 20 000 families depend on it. The sector employs a large number of seasonal workers, and it has a positive impact on the situation of farm workers, the most numerous section of the workforce. This makes it a fundamental feature of our already precarious economy, given that 90% of the production allocated to Spain comes from this region.What is the Commission's standpoint on the reform of the COM for tobacco as regards the quotas allocated to Spain and the payment of production premiums, and is the Commission aware that tobacco production in Europe covers only 27% of the quantity consumed, which means that reducing production would bring about a rise in imports?Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (21 March 1997)The Commission can reassure the Honourable Member that it does not intend to propose modification of the present premium and quota amounts in force in producing Member States.It can also confirm, as is clear from its recent report to Parliament and the Council on common organization in the tobacco sector, that it is aware that reduced Community production of raw tobacco would be offset by higher imports and hence have no impact on tobacco consumption in the Community.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 662/97 by Ludivina GARCÍA ARIAS to the Commission. Taxes on business companies
Date: 1997-03-06
Institutions: European Parliament, GARCIA ARIAS
Subjects: EU aid, European undertaking, aid to undertakings, corporation tax, free competition, small and medium-sized enterprises, tax harmonisation, tax system













EUR-Lex - 91997E0662 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E0662

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 662/97 by Ludivina GARCÍA ARIAS to the Commission. Taxes on business companies  


Official Journal C 367 , 04/12/1997 P. 0035 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0662/97 by Ludivina García Arias (PSE) to the Commission (6 March 1997)Subject: Taxes on business companiesDoes the Commission think that certain companies can devise tax strategies that give them a better deal in terms of company tax and seeking à la carte regional incentives and Community subsidies, and that these strategies are diluting the compensatory effects for backward or less-favoured regions and are affecting freedom of competition in the internal market?Can it be claimed that European SMUs enjoy the same opportunities to devise such tax strategies as other, larger undertakings?Does the Commission believe that these subjects should be included in our thinking on tax harmonization in the European Union?Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of Commission (15 May 1997)Community subsidies for businesses in assisted areas are subject to the tax regime applicable in the region concerned. Such aid may, under no circumstances, exceed the aid intensity ceilings authorized by the Commission under the competition policy. The ceilings are expressed in terms of net grant equivalent, in order to take account among other things of the different tax treatment of such aid as between Member States and regions.These subsidies are available to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the regions concerned. Similarly, the tax regime which applies to these subsidies applies to SMEs as well as to larger businesses.Regarding company taxation, the level of corporation and other taxes on businesses is a matter for Member States, provided that the measures taken by Member States do not distort competition in the internal market and do not prevent the smooth functioning of the internal market. Moreover, the Commission has set up a taxation policy group, chaired by the Member of the Commission with special responsibility for taxation and consisting of personal representatives of the Member States' Finance Ministers, to examine the possibility of common solutions in the tax area. This group started work on 11 March and further meetings are to take place shortly. One important issue in the group's discussions is measures to avoid harmful tax competition. The taxation of SMEs has also been identified as a possible area of future discussion within the group.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 668/97 by Nel van DIJK to the Commission. Schiphol considers dropping short-haul flights
Date: 1997-03-06
Institutions: European Parliament, VAN DIJK
Subjects: Netherlands, air traffic, airport, intra-EU transport, noise, rail transport













EUR-Lex - 91997E0668 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E0668

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 668/97 by Nel van DIJK to the Commission. Schiphol considers dropping short-haul flights  


Official Journal C 319 , 18/10/1997 P. 0154 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0668/97 by Nel van Dijk (V) to the Commission (6 March 1997)Subject: Schiphol considers dropping short-haul flightsIs the Commission aware that Schiphol airport, which risks exceeding the noise limits laid down by the Dutch government, is considering dropping flights between Schiphol and the closest European destinations and instead encouraging rail travel?Does any EC directive or regulation stand in the way of putting this idea into practice?Can it give an assurance that, in view of the increasing pollution also entailed by the expansion of air transport, it will do its utmost to promote the implementation of the greenest idea to emanate in recent years from Schiphol's management?Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission (28 April 1997)The Commission is aware of work going on in the Netherlands on implementing measures designed to ensure the respect of the overall noise limitations which are being imposed on Schiphol Airport. However, the Commission has not been officially informed by the Netherlands of any specific measure which may have been elaborated in the context of this work so far, including plans of the kind mentioned by the Honourable Member.Council Directive 92/14/EEC has established uniform rules for noisy aircraft at Community airports ((OJ L 76, 25.3.1992. )). However, that Directive does not apply to measures such as the exclusion of all flights to certain destinations regardless of the noise emissions from the aircraft used. On the other hand, Council Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92 on access for Community air carriers to intra-Community air routes ((OJ L 240, 24.8.1992. )) provides that when environmental problems exist, a Member State may limit access to an airport to address those problems. Any such limitations must, however, respect the procedural and substantive rules of that Regulation. In the absence of a detailed notification, the Commission cannot at this stage take any position on the question whether the specific idea mentioned by the Honourable Member would in fact be compatible with those rules.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 645/97 by W.G. van VELZEN to the Commission. Gas directive
Date: 1997-03-06
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: competitiveness, energy policy, energy production, energy supply, environmental protection, gas, liberalisation of the market, security of supply













EUR-Lex - 91997E0645 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E0645

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 645/97 by W.G. van VELZEN to the Commission. Gas directive  


Official Journal C 319 , 18/10/1997 P. 0145 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0645/97 by W.G. van Velzen (PPE) to the Commission (6 March 1997)Subject: Gas directiveCogeneration, in the proposal for a gas directive, is a process for making gas available efficiently to a number of different users. It is also less harmful to the environment than other processes. The source of cogeneration systems is, of course, gas.As part of the efforts by the Commission and the Dutch Presidency to liberalize the market for gas it is important to know to what extent this market is actually being liberalized and whether the advantages of liberalization will also benefit cogenerative systems.My question to the competent member of the Commission is therefore:When will the Commission be publishing the communication on the cogeneration strategy, given that the Dutch Presidency has made it known that cogeneration will be placed on the agenda of the forthcoming Energy Council if the communication is published in good time?Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission (15 April 1997)The energy policy white paper ((COM(95) 682. )) stated that the Commission will propose a strategy to promote co-generation and district heating in the Community. The communication on combined heat and power will be presented at the latest by the second half of this year.