do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1068/97 by Giulio FANTUZZI , Fiorella GHILARDOTTI , Rinaldo BONTEMPI to the Council. Dutch opposition to alteration of the arrangements for rice imports from Overseas Countries and Territories
Date: 1997-03-24
Institutions: BONTEMPI, European Parliament, FANTUZZI, GHILARDOTTI
Subjects: Court of Justice of the European Union, General Court (EU), Netherlands, import policy, overseas countries and territories, protective clause, rice, summary procedure













EUR-Lex - 91997E1068 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1068

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1068/97 by Giulio FANTUZZI , Fiorella GHILARDOTTI , Rinaldo BONTEMPI to the Council. Dutch opposition to alteration of the arrangements for rice imports from Overseas Countries and Territories  


Official Journal C 076 , 11/03/1998 P. 0031 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1068/97 by Giulio Fantuzzi (PSE), Fiorella Ghilardotti (PSE) and Rinaldo Bontempi (PSE) to the Council (24 March 1997)Subject: Dutch opposition to alteration of the arrangements for rice imports from Overseas Countries and TerritoriesA proposal to amend the arrangements for rice imports from Overseas Countries and Territories was submitted by the Commission, with the support of the Irish Presidency. At present it is proving impossible to approve this proposal because, despite the agreement of the 14 other Member States, the Dutch Government is firmly opposed.1. Does the Council consider this situation to be acceptable?2. What action does it intend to take to resolve the problem?Answer (25 September 1997)On 16 February 1996, the Commission submitted a proposal for a Council Decision amending at mid-term Council Decision 91/482/EEC of 25 July 1991 on the Association of the Overseas Countries and Territories with the European Community. In this communication the Commission proposed substantial modifications to the trade arrangements laid down by the Decision but the proposal also covers other areas, such as, in particular, the distribution of the financial resources for the OCT.The Irish Presidency proposed a compromise on the trade arrangements. The proposal was discussed by the Council (including the General Affairs Council), but failed to obtain the required unanimous consent.Apart from the mid-term review proposal, the Commission, having noted the need for safeguard measures, which had also been requested by certain Member States, adopted Regulations 21/97 and 764/97, which were replaced by Council Regulations Nos 304/97 and 1036/97 respectively, introducing safeguard measures in respect of rice imports originating in the OCT.The Netherlands, the Netherlands Antilles and a rice mill have decided to lodge a request for annulment of the Council Regulations with the Court of Justice and the Court of First Instance respectively, and to introduce applications for the adoption of interim measures.
Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 19/97 of 24 March 1997 amending Annex XX (Environment) to the EEA Agreement
Date: 1997-03-24
Institutions: EEA Joint Committee
Subjects: European Economic Area, biotechnology, environmental protection, genetically modified organism, product safety, public health, technological change








L_1997182EN.01005301.xml










10.7.1997   


EN


Official Journal of the European Communities


L 182/53





DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE
No 19/97
of 24 March 1997
amending Annex XX (Environment) 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, hereafter referred to as ‘the Agreement’, and in particular Article 98 thereof,
Whereas Annex XX to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 61/95 (1);
Whereas Commission Directive 94/51/EC of 7 November 1994 adapting to technical progress Council Directive 90/219/EEC on the contained use of genetically modified micro-organisms (2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
The following shall be added in point 24 (Council Directive 90/219/EEC) of Annex XX to the Agreement:
‘, as amended by:






—



394 L 0051: Commission Directive 94/51/EC of 7 November 1994 (OJ No L 297, 18. 11. 1994, p. 29).’




Article 2
The texts of Commission Directive 94/51/EC 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 251, 3. 10. 1995, p. 43.

(2)  OJ No L 297, 18. 11. 1994, p. 29.
Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 14/97 of 24 March 1997 amending Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) to the EEA Agreement
Date: 1997-03-24
Institutions: EEA Joint Committee
Subjects: European Economic Area, crop production, food inspection, fruit, pesticide, pesticide residue, vegetable








L_1997182EN.01004601.xml










10.7.1997   


EN


Official Journal of the European Communities


L 182/46





DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE
No 14/97
of 24 March 1997
amending Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) 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 II to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 51/96 (1);
Whereas Council Directive 95/61 /EC of 29 November 1995 amending Annex II to Directive 90/642/EEC relating to the fixing of maximum levels for pesticide residues in and on certain products of plant origin, including fruit and vegetables (2), is to be incorporated into the Agreement,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
The following indent shall be added in point 54 (Council Directive 90/642/EEC) in Chapter XII of Annex II to the Agreement:






‘—



395 L 0061: Council Directive 95/61/EC of 29 November 1995 (OJ No L 292, 7. 12. 1995, p. 27).’




Article 2
The texts of Council Directive 95/61/EC 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 21, 23. 1. 1997, p. 6.

(2)  OJ No L 292, 7. 12. 1995, p. 27.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1140/97 by Cristiana MUSCARDINI to the Commission. Infringement of Community regulations: the waste tip in Ca Gualdo (Pesaro)
Date: 1997-03-24
Institutions: European Parliament, MUSCARDINI
Subjects: Italy, environmental impact, health risk, industrial waste, infringement of EU law, project evaluation, storage of waste, toxic substance, waste disposal, waste management













EUR-Lex - 91997E1140 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1140

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1140/97 by Cristiana MUSCARDINI to the Commission. Infringement of Community regulations: the waste tip in Ca Gualdo (Pesaro)  


Official Journal C 373 , 09/12/1997 P. 0076 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1140/97 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission (24 March 1997)Subject: Infringement of Community regulations: the waste tip in Ca Gualdo (Pesaro)The regional authorities of the Marches have given the green light to the building of a waste tip in the commune of Ca Gualdo, in the province of Pesaro, which is to receive Community funding under Objective 5b even though the project has not been subject to an environmental impact assessment as required by Directive 85/337/EEC ((OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40. )).In its present form such a project contradicts and infringes all the provisions of the above-mentioned directive and above all endangers public health.1. What action does the Commission intend to take in response to this flagrant breach of Community environmental impact regulations, given that it provided the funds which may already have been used for the planned waste tip?2. Does the Commission intend to ask the regional authorities of the Marches to explain why they clearly infringed the criteria for Objective 5b funding?Answer given by Ms Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (22 May 1997)The single programming document (SPD), Objective 5b 1994-1999, for the Marches region provides for the building of a treatment plant for processing special, toxic or hazardous industrial waste.The plant would consist, inter alia, of a waste sorting and processing centre and a landfill site for the final disposal of waste which cannot be reused.The initial plan has to be assessed by the regional technical authorities and approved by the Marches regional government. According to the implementation report on the Objective 5b single programming document for the Marches region and the information notified by the regional authorities, the plan for the landfill tip provided for in measure 3.1.2A has not yet been approved. So far, only the site has been agreed by the regional authorities, acting on a proposal from the provincial government.Under 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, p.40. )), planning permission for disposal plants for toxic and hazardous waste cannot be given until an environmental impact assessment has been carried out. The Commission will ensure that this Directive is complied with.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1139/97 by Cristiana MUSCARDINI to the Commission. Reclamation plan for polluted land
Date: 1997-03-24
Institutions: European Parliament, MUSCARDINI
Subjects: EU Member State, action programme, environmental policy, polluted area, polluter pays principle, pollution control measures













EUR-Lex - 91997E1139 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1139

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1139/97 by Cristiana MUSCARDINI to the Commission. Reclamation plan for polluted land  


Official Journal C 367 , 04/12/1997 P. 0084 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1139/97 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission (24 March 1997)Subject: Reclamation plan for polluted landThe Community approach to the management of urban waste, land used for waste tips, disused factories and places where industrial accidents have occurred provides for various support measures including the reclamation of contaminated areas.Back in 1988, the regional authorities of Lombardy commissioned a number of companies to carry out studies with a view to drawing up reclamation plans for polluted land. These studies identified 2 120 potentially contaminated sites and put the cost of reclamation at 120 billion. In-depth inquiries, together with detailed statements to the competent authorities, would appear to show that only 70 billion were required, i.e. 50 billion less than the original figure.Will the Commission draw up a directive which identifies potentially polluted land requiring immediate reclamation, stipulates which areas should have priority and provides for the auditing of allocated funds and financial support for studies drawing up proposals for reclamation projects?Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (6 May 1997)The Commission is aware that there is indeed a significant number of contaminated sites within the Community. Several Member States have already set up strategies and action programmes to tackle that problem.In its communication on the review of the Community strategy for waste management ((COM(96) 399 final. )), the Commission stated (paragraph 56):'The Commission is of the opinion that the identification and rehabilitation of such contaminated sites is first of all the task of Member States, which will also have to consider to what extent the polluter pays principle should be made operational for such cases. In future, an exchange of experience, of know-how and of clean-up technologies among Member States is desirable. This problem is likely to be of particular importance in Central and Eastern Europe'.Thus, the drawing up of a proposal for a directive on contaminated sites is not considered a priority task for the Commission.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1020/97 by Hiltrud BREYER to the Council. EU research funding for cloning experiments
Date: 1997-03-24
Institutions: BREYER, European Parliament
Subjects: EU aid, EU financing, genetic engineering, genetically modified organism, scientific research, sheep













EUR-Lex - 91997E1020 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1020

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1020/97 by Hiltrud BREYER to the Council. EU research funding for cloning experiments  


Official Journal C 391 , 23/12/1997 P. 0034 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1020/97 by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Council (24 March 1997)Subject: EU research funding for cloning experiments1. (a) Has the Roshin Institute in Edinburgh received research funding from the European Union?(b) If so, how much?2. (a) Has EU funding been utilized directly or indirectly to finance cloning experiments with sheep cells by this institute?(b) How much EU funding has been utilized directly and indirectly?3. (a) Have any EU funds been used directly and indirectly for cloning experiments with sheep?(b) Which institutes receive such funding?(c) How much EU funding has each institute received?Answer (14 July 1997)It is for the Commission to provide an answer to this Question, in view of the Commission's competence to implement and monitor Community research programmes.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1128/97 by Carmen DÍEZ DE RIVERA ICAZA to the Commission. Tourists and whales in the Canary Islands
Date: 1997-03-24
Institutions: DIEZ DE RIVERA ICAZA, European Parliament
Subjects: Canary Islands, EU action, application of EU law, marine mammal, protected area, protected species, protection of animal life, protection of animals, tourism













EUR-Lex - 91997E1128 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1128

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1128/97 by Carmen DÍEZ DE RIVERA ICAZA to the Commission. Tourists and whales in the Canary Islands  


Official Journal C 373 , 09/12/1997 P. 0074 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1128/97 by Carmen Díez de Rivera Icaza (PSE) to the Commission (24 March 1997)Subject: Tourists and whales in the Canary IslandsGiven the concern of most Member States for the protection of animals, is the Commission aware of the harassment by tourist vessels of families of whales in Tenerife and does it plan to devise any measures, aid or cooperation for the Cetological Institute of the Canary Islands to protect the whales from intrusive tourist vessels?Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (7 May 1997)Only one cetacean species, the bottle-nose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus), is included in Annex II to Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora ((OJ L 206, 22.7.1992. )). All the species of this family are included in Annex IV to the Directive.To comply with the Directive and conserve the habitat of the bottle-nose dolphin, the Government of the Canaries recently proposed two special conservation areas for inclusion in the Natura 2000 network. It has also published Decree 320/1995 governing tourist activity in respect of observation of cetaceans in the region's waters.With regard to possible Commission aid for the protection of cetaceans, the 'Proyecto de apoyo a la conservación de Caretta caretta y tursiops truncatus en las islas Canarias' project, put forward by the Consejería de politíca territorial of the Government of the Canaries under the Life-Nature 1997 programme, is at the evaluation stage.The Commission is currently supporting a project that aims to demonstrate the potential of voluntary financial schemes within the European tourism industry, as an approach to generating monetary contributions from visitors towards the conservation and tourism management of tourism destinations. One of the schemes consists of an extensive research exercise amongst visitors in Tenerife based on the conservation of dolphins and whales. Another scheme is the promotion of conservation holidays concerned with pilot whale watching in Tenerife, through attracting tourists to pay for the cost of research on the effects of tourism on the cetaceans of the area. The project, selected in 1995 under the Community action plan to assist tourism, will be completed by July 1997.
Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 17/97 of 24 March 1997 amending Annex XIII (Transport) to the EEA Agreement
Date: 1997-03-24
Institutions: EEA Joint Committee
Subjects: European Economic Area, carriage of goods, carriage of passengers, carrier, recognition of diplomas, right of establishment, road transport








L_1997182EN.01005001.xml










10.7.1997   


EN


Official Journal of the European Communities


L 182/50





DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE
No 17/97
of 24 March 1997
amending Annex XIII (Transport) to the EEA Agreement
THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,
Having regard to the Agreement of 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 22/96 (1);
Whereas Council Directive 96/26/EC of 29 April 1996 on admission to the occupation of road haulage operator and road passenger transport operator and mutual recognition of diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications intended to facilitate for these operators the right of freedom of establishment in national and international transport operations (2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
Article 1
Point 19 (Council Directive No 77/796/EEC) in Annex XIII to the Agreement shall be replaced by the following:







‘19.



396 L 0026: Council Directive 96/26/EC of 29 April 1996 on admission to the occupation of road haulage operator and road passenger transport operator and mutual recognition of diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications intended to facilitate for those operators the right to freedom of establishment in national and international transport operations (OJ No L 124, 23. 5. 1996, p. 1).’





Article 2
The text of sub-heading (vi) in chapter II of Annex XIII and the text of point 28 (Council Directive No 74/561/EEC) in Annex XIII to the Agreement shall be deleted.
Article 3
The sub-heading ‘(ix) Admission to the occupation (passengers)’ in chapter II of Annex XIII, the text of point 35 (Council Directive No 74/562/EEC) and the text of point 36 (Council Regulation (EEC) No 3572/90) in Annex XIII to the Agreement shall be deleted.
Article 4
The texts of Council Directive 96/26/EC in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, which are annexed to the respective language versions of this Decision, are authentic.
Article 5
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 6
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 186, 25. 7. 1996, p. 73.

(2)  OJ No L 124, 23. 5. 1996, p. 1.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1125/97 by Carmen DÍEZ DE RIVERA ICAZA to the Commission. Noise and alarm systems
Date: 1997-03-24
Institutions: DIEZ DE RIVERA ICAZA, European Parliament
Subjects: EU law, noise, security services, theft













EUR-Lex - 91997E1125 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1125

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1125/97 by Carmen DÍEZ DE RIVERA ICAZA to the Commission. Noise and alarm systems  


Official Journal C 319 , 18/10/1997 P. 0233 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1125/97 by Carmen Díez de Rivera Icaza (PSE) to the Commission (24 March 1997)Subject: Noise and alarm systemsHave any Member States recently been granted exemptions allowing the continued installation of security alarms on the outside of buildings, the noise from which causes a disturbance to those living nearby?Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (28 April 1997)There is no Community legislation concerning the installation and the use of security alarms. Neither is there any legislation concerning the noise emission of these installations. These are issues where the responsibility lies with the Member States.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1126/97 by Carmen DÍEZ DE RIVERA ICAZA to the Commission. Human tissue for transplants
Date: 1997-03-24
Institutions: DIEZ DE RIVERA ICAZA, European Parliament
Subjects: competence of the Member States, organ transplantation, originating product, supervisory power













EUR-Lex - 91997E1126 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1126

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1126/97 by Carmen DÍEZ DE RIVERA ICAZA to the Commission. Human tissue for transplants  


Official Journal C 319 , 18/10/1997 P. 0233 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1126/97 by Carmen Díez de Rivera Icaza (PSE) to the Commission (24 March 1997)Subject: Human tissue for transplantsWhat checks has the Commission devised, or does it plan to devise, to monitor the origin and destination of tissue obtained for transplants?Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (28 April 1997)The checks carried out to identify the origin and destination of human tissue obtained for transplants are devised by the Member States themselves, in the context of the specific organisation of each health care system. The Commission has no involvement in this.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1124/97 by Patrick COX to the Commission. Structural funds - plant relocations
Date: 1997-03-24
Institutions: COX, European Parliament
Subjects: EU aid, Structural Funds, transfer of businesses













EUR-Lex - 91997E1124 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1124

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1124/97 by Patrick COX to the Commission. Structural funds - plant relocations  


Official Journal C 373 , 09/12/1997 P. 0074 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1124/97 by Patrick Cox (ELDR) to the Commission (24 March 1997)Subject: Structural funds - plant relocationsUnder the current round of EU structural funds (1994 to today), can the Commission specify and name by plant the number of industrial relocations which received any direct assistance under the structural funds; can it also specify by plant and by state the amount of structural fund grant aid received?Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (23 May 1997)The Commission is not able to provide the detailed information asked for by the Honourable Member.The reason for this is that, when applications for assistance from the Structural Funds are being considered which relate to investment in productive capacity, where that plant may have come from is not included as a criterion for appraising the request. Nor is this information required when Member States come to draw up their interim and final reports on implementation of aid from the Funds.However, the Commission is looking into ways of identifying relocations of industrial plant better in the future, especially where they are likely to receive assistance from the Structural Funds. In this connection, the Commission would like to point out that cases of a straight transfer of activities by a company are rare since relocations are more usually carried out as part of a restructuring exercise or a rationalization of activities. Any relocations which may have qualified for Fund assistance in the past would for the most part have been of the second kind.