do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1119/97 by Corrado AUGIAS to the Commission. Conversion of the Enel power station in the Stanic district of Bari
Date: 1997-03-24
Institutions: AUGIAS, European Parliament
Subjects: Italy, application of EU law, domestic waste, environmental impact, power plant, project evaluation, waste disposal, waste management, waste recycling













EUR-Lex - 91997E1119 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1119

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1119/97 by Corrado AUGIAS to the Commission. Conversion of the Enel power station in the Stanic district of Bari  


Official Journal C 373 , 09/12/1997 P. 0073 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1119/97 by Corrado Augias (PSE) to the Commission (24 March 1997)Subject: Conversion of the Enel power station in the Stanic district of BariDoes the Commission know about the draft agreement signed on 1 August 1996 between Bari city council, ENEL Spa and Elettroambiente Spa concerning the conversion of the Enel power station located in the Stanic district of Bari into a heating plant burning urban waste?Has the Commission ascertained that this plant does not contravene the Union's policy regarding waste disposal? Can it guarantee that all the criteria of transparency compulsory in such cases have been respected? Finally, can the Commission guarantee that all the environmental impact assessments required when substantial changes are made to plants of this type have been carried out?Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (6 May 1997)The Commission was not aware of the draft agreement referred to by the Honourable Member.On the basis of the information supplied by the Honourable Member, the Commission is unable, at this stage, to determine whether the project in question concerns the modification of a thermal power station with a heat output capacity of at least 300 MW or whether it is for an installation to dispose of industrial waste and household refuse. In any event, this type of project appears in Annex II to Directive 85/337/EEC on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment ((OJ L 175, 5.7.1985. )).The Directive stipulates that such projects must be made subject to an environmental impact assessment where Member States consider that their characteristics, viz. their nature, size or location, so require.The Commission will contact the Italian authorities to discover whether the competent authorities have examined the project in question to establish whether, given its characteristics, it should or should not be made subject to an environmental impact assessment.In addition, the recovery and final disposal of domestic refuse must meet the requirements of Directive 75/442/EEC on waste ((OJ L 194, 25.7.1975. )), as amended by Directive 91/156/EEC ((OJ L 78, 26..3.1991. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1116/97 by Joan VALLVÉ to the Commission. Use of place-names in official documents
Date: 1997-03-24
Institutions: European Parliament, VALLVE
Subjects: Cohesion Fund, Spain, activity report, official document, translation













EUR-Lex - 91997E1116 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1116

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1116/97 by Joan VALLVÉ to the Commission. Use of place-names in official documents  


Official Journal C 373 , 09/12/1997 P. 0072 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1116/97 by Joan Vallvé (ELDR) to the Commission (24 March 1997)Subject: Use of place-names in official documentsThe author of this question has noticed that in certain documents issued by the Commission the names of places in Catalonia, the Balearics and the Region of Valencia do not appear in their current official form and are still being written in the Castilian Spanish form imposed by the political regime in power before the introduction of democracy.For example, in document COM (96) 388 final of 4 September 1996, the Annual Report of the Cohesion Fund, the following names are used:- on pages 20, 58 and 355: Lérida y Gerona instead of Lleida y Girona- on page 20: Figueras instead of Figueres- on page 87: Játiva instead of Xàtiva- on page 105: Puerto de la Selva instead of Port de la Selva- on page 110: San Pedro Pescador instead of Sant Pere Pescador- on page 215: Sta. Coloma de Gramanet instead of Sta. Coloma de GramenetThe correct forms indicated are those given in the report on town names and postal codes published by the Spanish National Statistical Institute on 1 May 1996.Why do the Commission's employees not comply with the rules on place-names laid down by the above-mentioned official organization?Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (13 May 1997)In the decisions on Cohesion Fund assistance, the Commission uses the place names which appear in the applications for aid sent by the competent authorities of the Member State.For the annual report on the Cohesion Fund, the Spanish version of which is a translation of the original drafted in French or English, the rule is to use the place name in the language into which the document is being translated.In order to dispel any difficulties in this matter, the Commission will ask the Spanish Permanent Representative to provide it with the official list of place names used by the Spanish Government, to which the Commission will refer in future.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1117/97 by Carmen DÍEZ DE RIVERA ICAZA to the Commission. The Blue Flag and the quality of bathing water
Date: 1997-03-24
Institutions: DIEZ DE RIVERA ICAZA, European Parliament
Subjects: Denmark, bathing water, eco-label, ecologism, environmental protection, non-governmental organisation













EUR-Lex - 91997E1117 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1117

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1117/97 by Carmen DÍEZ DE RIVERA ICAZA to the Commission. The Blue Flag and the quality of bathing water  


Official Journal C 319 , 18/10/1997 P. 0231 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1117/97 by Carmen Díez de Rivera Icaza (PSE) to the Commission (24 March 1997)Subject: The Blue Flag and the quality of bathing waterIn order to avoid confusion could the Commission once again state that the Blue Flag is not awarded by the Commission and specify the nature of the foundation which does award it and the Commission's links with it?Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (24 April 1997)The blue flags are awarded by a non-governmental organisation, the Foundation for environmental education in Europe (FEEE). The organisation is based in Denmark (Scandiagade 13, DK - 2450 Copenhagen).National operators in different countries in Europe, and not only in the Community, follow and examine beaches that have shown an interest in getting a blue flag. A great number of criteria are taken into account, such as facilities on the beach, environmental education programmes, safety equipment, and also water quality. The assessment of water quality is done on the basis of the guideline values (the most strict values) required under Council Directive 76/160/EEC concerning the quality of bathing water ((OJ L 31, 5.2.1976. )).The Commission's involvement in the blue flag campaign is two-fold. It delivers the information on the bathing water quality of the Member States by means of its computer programme. Representatives of the Commission are also members of the European jury, which decides on problem cases. The Commission supports the blue flag campaign and the FEEE by a yearly financial contribution, which is revised and negotiated on a year by year basis.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1131/97 by Carmen DÍEZ DE RIVERA ICAZA to the Commission. Tourism and people with disabilities
Date: 1997-03-24
Institutions: DIEZ DE RIVERA ICAZA, European Parliament
Subjects: EU policy, disabled person, facilities for people with disabilities, tourism, tourism policy, tourist profession, user guide, vocational training













EUR-Lex - 91997E1131 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1131

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1131/97 by Carmen DÍEZ DE RIVERA ICAZA to the Commission. Tourism and people with disabilities  


Official Journal C 319 , 18/10/1997 P. 0235 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1131/97 by Carmen Díez de Rivera Icaza (PSE) to the Commission (24 March 1997)Subject: Tourism and people with disabilitiesAs the tourist season starts, what steps is the Commission taking to facilitate the mobility of people with disabilities in tourist resorts in the European Union?Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission (15 May 1997)The Commission has established the European experts group 'Independent living - tourism for all'. Work has focused on the problem of accessibility in tourism facilities, the training of tourism professionals catering for tourists with disabilities, and the provision of information. A draft voluntary accessibility standard, which could be used throughout Europe, is currently under discussion.In the former action plan to assist tourism (1993-1995) ((Council Decision 92/421/EC - OJ L 231, 13.8.1992. )) the need for information which would facilitate access to tourism, and which could be made available to both tourism professionals and disabled people, lead to research being undertaken with a view to publication of a handbook for tourism professionals, as well as travel guides for disabled tourists. The handbook has recently been published and a copy is forwarded direct to the Honourable Member and to the Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1144/97 by Leonie van BLADEL to the Council. Surinam and international drug trafficking
Date: 1997-03-24
Institutions: European Parliament, VAN BLADEL
Subjects: France, Netherlands, Surinam, drug traffic, extradition, foreign national, institutional cooperation

3. 4. 98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 102/1

I

(Information)

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

WRITTEN QUESTIONS WITH ANSWER

(98/C 102/01)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1144/97

by Leonie van Bladel (UPE) to the Council

(24 March 1997)

Subject: Surinam and international drug trafficking

The  Netherlands  Presidency  recently  summoned  the  Brazilian  and  the  Chinese  ambassadors  to  express  its
displeasure  at  Brazil  and  China  receiving  a  diplomatic  mission  from  Surinam  led  by  the  former  dictator
Desi  Bouterse.  The  Presidency(cid:146)s  view  is  that  this  enhances  Bouterse(cid:146)s  standing.  The  Presidency  is  clearly
referring  to  Bouterse(cid:146)s  heavy  involvement  in  the  international  trade  in  cocaine  and  the  problems  that  the
Netherlands and France, in particular, have suffered as a result.

Has the Netherlands Presidency also expressed its displeasure to Surinam(cid:146)s ambassador in The Hague at

1.
Bouterse(cid:146)s diplomatic missions to Surinam(cid:146)s ambassador and, if not, why not?

2.
Is  the  international  action  undertaken  by  the  Netherlands  Presidency  actually  justified,  given  that  the
Netherlands Ministry of Justice is clearly reluctant to issue an international arrest or search warrant notice for
Bouterse?

3. Would it not be more sensible, given the enormous problems which Bouterse(cid:146)s drug trafficking has caused
for northern France and the city of Lille, in particular, if the Netherlands Presidency were to undertake this and
future diplomatic action jointly with France?

Answer

(7 November 1997)

The Presidency of the Council was assumed by Luxembourg on 1 July 1997. In addition, questions of extradition
between a Member State and a third country fall outside the Council(cid:146)s sphere of competence. Finally, the Council
was not informed of the demarches to which the Honourable Member(cid:146)s question refers.

(98/C 102/02)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1444/97

by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Council

(5 May 1997)

Subject: Employment, unemployment and the Maastricht criteria

Unemployment has reached such inconceivable levels in the EU that it is causing social unrest. Unfortunately,
however,  it  has  not  spurred  either  conservative  or  socialist  governments  in  Europe  into  immediate  action  to
alleviate the situation of the young unemployed.
Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 18/97 of 24 March 1997 amending Annex XIII (Transport) to the EEA Agreement
Date: 1997-03-24
Institutions: EEA Joint Committee
Subjects: European Economic Area, administrative procedure, civil aviation, harmonisation of standards, safety standard, technical regulations, transport safety








L_1997182EN.01005201.xml










10.7.1997   


EN


Official Journal of the European Communities


L 182/52





DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE
No 18/97
of 24 March 1997
amending Annex XIII (Transport) to the EEA Agreement
THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,
Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, as adjusted by the Protocol adjusting the Agreement on the European Economic Area, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Agreement’, and in particular Article 98 thereof,
Whereas Annex XIII to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 33/95 (1);
Whereas Commission Regulation (EC) No 2176/96 of 13 November 1996 amending to scientific and technical progress Council Regulation (EEC) No 3922/91 (2) on the harmonization of technical requirements and administrative procedures in the field of civil aviation is to be incorporated into the Agreement,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
The following shall be added in point 66a (Council Regulation (EEC) No 3922/91) in Annex XIII to the Agreement:
‘, as amended by:






—



396 R 2176: Commission Regulation (EC) No 2176/96 of 13 November 1996 (OJ No L 291, 14. 11. 1996, p. 15).’




Article 2
The texts of Regulation (EC) No 2176/96 in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, which are annexed to the respective language versions of this Decision, are authentic.
Article 3
This Decision shall enter into force on 1 April 1997, provided that all the notifications under Article 103 (1) of the Agreement have been made to the EEA Joint Committee.
Article 4
This Decision shall be published in the EEA section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Communities.


Done at Brussels, 24 March 1997.


For the EEA Joint Committee


The President

C. DAY




(1)  OJ No L 273, 16. 11. 1995, p. 52.

(2)  OJ No L 291, 14. 11. 1996, p. 15.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1046/97 by Iñigo MÉNDEZ DE VIGO to the Council. SFOR military units in Bosnia
Date: 1997-03-24
Institutions: European Parliament, MENDEZ DE VIGO
Subjects: Bosnia and Herzegovina, EU relations, UN Security Council, civil defence, economic reconstruction, forces abroad, international aid, paramilitary force, peacekeeping













EUR-Lex - 91997E1046 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1046

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1046/97 by Iñigo MÉNDEZ DE VIGO to the Council. SFOR military units in Bosnia  


Official Journal C 391 , 23/12/1997 P. 0041 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1046/97 by Iñigo Méndez de Vigo (PPE) to the Council (24 March 1997)Subject: SFOR military units in BosniaWhat remit has the European Union bestowed on the SFOR military units deployed in Bosnia and what is their margin for manoeuvre?Answer (4 July 1997)The Stabilisation Force "SFOR¨ was authorised by UN Security Council Resolution 1088/96 of 12 December 1996, which also sets out the rules of engagement. Although individual EU Member States have contributed an important share of the personnel and finances, the EU as such is not responsible for the implementation of the military aspects of the Dayton/Paris Agreements on the basis of which IFOR and its follow-up force SFOR have been established. Therefore, "SFOR¨ is a military initiative not carried out under the auspices of the European Union.Nevertheless, also in the light of the EU's leading role in the reconstruction and rehabilitation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the EU has actively participated in the international decision-making process which led to the deployment of IFOR and later SFOR in order to provide a safe environment for reconstruction and return of refugees. Against this background, the EU has made an essential contribution to the implementation of the conclusions adopted at the Peace Implementation Council's Conferences which were held in London in December 1995 and 1996 with the aim of co-ordinating the international assistance to stabilisation and reconstruction in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1134/97 by Carlos ROBLES PIQUER to the Commission. New NATO Research and Technology Organization
Date: 1997-03-24
Institutions: European Parliament, ROBLES PIQUER
Subjects: NATO, aeronautical industry, aerospace industry, applied research, civil aviation, common security and defence policy, military aircraft, technology













EUR-Lex - 91997E1134 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1134

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1134/97 by Carlos ROBLES PIQUER to the Commission. New NATO Research and Technology Organization  


Official Journal C 391 , 23/12/1997 P. 0044 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1134/97 by Carlos Robles Piquer (PPE) to the Commission (24 March 1997)Subject: New NATO Research and Technology OrganizationNATO's new R& T Board, which held its first meeting at the end of November 1996 as the governing body of NATO's Research and Technology Organization, replaces the previous management bodies of the Defence Research Group and AGARD (Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Development).Given the desire to continue emphasizing aeronautical technology in the fifth framework programme and the growing need, within the Community framework, for technological assessments with a solid scientific basis, does the Commission plan to monitor the Technology Coordination Reports, which were first compiled in 1995, and draw conclusions on the possible implications for the development of civil technology of this source of information which is available to most Member States?Answer given by Ms Cresson on behalf of the Commission (2 June 1997)Information gathered on reports concerning technological cooperation within the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) indicates that these reports deal chiefly with the reorganization of science and technology activities carried out within the organization.The Honourable Member's question is a pertinent one, since certain technologies have a dual use and research in such fields as aeronautics is of both civilian and military interest.Research carried out within defence organizations such as NATO may also have an impact on the development of civilian technologies, as supported by Community programmes.However, information on defence research into dual-use technologies is generally sensitive and not published. Consequently, if there is to be complementarity between civilian and defence research, it must be coordinated at Member State level and between the firms and research institutions involved.In the field of aeronautics, the Commission has set up a task force to provide an interface between the industries and research centres involved in both civilian and defence research. This exchange of information makes it possible to avoid duplication of effort, particularly in dual-use technological fields.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1114/97 by David BOWE to the Commission. Green Paper on food policy
Date: 1997-03-24
Institutions: BOWE, European Parliament
Subjects: EU Member State, EU publication, food additive, foodstuff, human nutrition, report, scientific research, vitamin













EUR-Lex - 91997E1114 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1114

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1114/97 by David BOWE to the Commission. Green Paper on food policy  


Official Journal C 367 , 04/12/1997 P. 0080 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1114/97 by David Bowe (PSE) to the Commission (24 March 1997)Subject: Green Paper on food policyDoes the Commission propose, as part of the Green Paper on Food Policy, a strategy for the fortification of food with essential vitamins and minerals necessary to maintain good human health?If not, why not?Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (12 May 1997)The Commission has, on the request of Member States initiated work on the subject of the addition of vitamins and minerals to foodstuffs. A task on this subject, within the framework of cooperation by Member States in the scientific examination of questions relating to food, has been completed and the relevant report will be finalised shortly. The Commission is further preparing a discussion paper on the subject which will raise the issues that need to be discussed and invite comments from all interested parties.On the basis of these consultations the Commission will consider any necessary proposals on the subject. For these reasons the green paper on food policy ((COM(97) 176. )) does not consider this issue in detail.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1063/97 by Cristiana MUSCARDINI to the Council. Diplomatic and consular network
Date: 1997-03-24
Institutions: European Parliament, MUSCARDINI
Subjects: Belgium, Italy, competence of the Member States, consulate, diplomatic representation, migrant













EUR-Lex - 91997E1063 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1063

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1063/97 by Cristiana MUSCARDINI to the Council. Diplomatic and consular network  


Official Journal C 367 , 04/12/1997 P. 0073 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1063/97 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Council (24 March 1997)Subject: Diplomatic and consular networkAs part of the budgetary restrictions connected with the reduction of the public deficit, the Italian Foreign Ministry intends to reorganize its consular network in Belgium by closing down the offices in Mons, La Louvière, Genk, Antwerp and Namur in order to concentrate on the three main offices in Brussels, Liège and Charleroi.These closures would penalize more than 300 000 Italians living in Belgium. The Foreign Ministry consulted neither the relevant ad hoc organizations, nor the democratically elected committee representatives, nor even the associations or parties present in Belgium before putting forward its reorganization proposals.1. Will the Council intervene as a matter of urgency to ensure that the immigrant population as a whole enjoys the right to diplomatic and consular assistance, adjusted according to the actual presence of immigrants and located in those places with the highest concentration of such immigrants?2. Will the Council intervene, should the restructuring go ahead on grounds of serious public debt problems, by ensuring that, in reorganizing diplomatic and consular offices, the necessary economies are made without cutting back on essential services or jeopardizing the protection of the cultural heritage of the country of origin?Answer (5 June 1997)Decisions concerning the organisation of the diplomatic and consular network of Member States are outside the competence of the Council.