do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1160/97 by Richard HOWITT to the Commission. Regional breakdown of European Regional Development Fund
Date: 1997-03-26
Institutions: European Parliament, HOWITT
Subjects: European Regional Development Fund, Structural Funds, activity report, implementation of the budget, regional development, structural policy













EUR-Lex - 91997E1160 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1160

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1160/97 by Richard HOWITT to the Commission. Regional breakdown of European Regional Development Fund  


Official Journal C 373 , 09/12/1997 P. 0079 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1160/97 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (26 March 1997)Subject: Regional breakdown of European Regional Development FundWill the Commission produce, for the latest year for which statistics are available, a concise table showing breakdown of total ERDF payments by NUTS III regions in Europe? For comparison, will it show the same figures for 1993? Given the lack of transparency entailed in providing inconsistent and incomplete figures in this respect, will the Commission commit itself to producing just such a table in each future Annual Report on the operation of the Structural Funds?Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (14 May 1997)Since the 6th annual report (1994), which concerned the first year of the 1994-99 ((COM(95) 583. )) programming period, the Commission has published each year a regional breakdown of the financial implementation in its annual report on the Structural Funds.In the 7th report (1995) ((COM(96) 502. )), which has been forwarded to Parliament where it is currently being examined, this regional breakdown shows the implementation of all the Structural Funds for all assistance (Community Support Frameworks, single programming documents and Community initiatives).The tables in question show implementation for the year covered by the report, as well as aggregate implementation since 1994, not only for payments but also for commitment appropriations.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1155/97 by Wolfgang KREISSL-DÖRFLER to the Commission. Use of appropriations for the European Year against Racism
Date: 1997-03-26
Institutions: European Parliament, KREISSL-DOERFLER
Subjects: Germany, administrative formalities, distribution of EU funding, non-governmental organisation, racism, regions of Germany













EUR-Lex - 91997E1155 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1155

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1155/97 by Wolfgang KREISSL-DÖRFLER to the Commission. Use of appropriations for the European Year against Racism  


Official Journal C 319 , 18/10/1997 P. 0237 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1155/97 by Wolfgang Kreissl-Dörfler (V) to the Commission (26 March 1997)Subject: Use of appropriations for the European Year against Racism1. How much of the money provided for the European Year against Racism has been spent or committed so far?2. Who is the main beneficiary of this money in Germany? (Please provide details broken down by Federal, Land and local authorities, NGOs and academic bodies)3. Application forms were not available in Germany until mid-February. How is it that a considerable number of projects have already (10 February 1997) been proposed in the provisional national programme in Germany?4. The last possible date for applying for funding has been set at 1 May 1997. Given the shortage of funds, how does the Commission rate the prospects of NGOs' applications being approved?Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (25 April 1997)1. and 2. The first selection round (deadline for applications 1 March 1997) is currently being finalised. The information requested will therefore only be available at the end of April.3. The activities and events listed in the German national programme are not necessarily funded by the Commission from the European year budget. Projects selected for Community support during the first selection round (1 March 1997) will be starting on 1 May 1997 at the earliest. It is therefore likely that the projects to which the Honourable Member refers are supported through other sources of funding at national, regional or local level.4. Concerning the funding available for projects taking place as from 1 July 1997 (deadline for applications 1 May 1997), financial planning will ensure that adequate funds are set aside for that selection round within the limits of the overall budget. Organisations applying then will benefit from exactly the same treatment as those which applied during the first selection round.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 560/97 of 26 March 1997 on additional quantities of textile products to be made available to the Republic of Indonesia
Date: 1997-03-26
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Indonesia, import policy, originating product, quantitative restriction, textile product













EUR-Lex - 31997R0560 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



31997R0560

Commission Regulation (EC) No 560/97 of 26 March 1997 on additional quantities of textile products to be made available to the Republic of Indonesia  


Official Journal L 085 , 27/03/1997 P. 0033 - 0033 





COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 560/97 of 26 March 1997 on additional quantities of textile products to be made available to the Republic of IndonesiaTHE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3030/93 of 12 October 1993 on common rules for imports of certain textile products from third countries (1), as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 152/97 (2), and in particular Article 8 thereof,Whereas for certain categories of textile products Indonesia had issued 1996 export licences for amounts in excess of its 1996 quota levels and that Indonesia is willing to adopt the necessary measures to take into account this over-licensing in the management of its exports in 1997;Whereas, this has led to a situation where importers are unable to receive an import licence for goods which have already been paid for and shipped to the European Community and that the goods are consequently blocked in the ports of arrival;Whereas overshipments of this type are an exceptional occurrence due to a breakdown in communication between Indonesia's central licensing office and its regional offices;Whereas Indonesia and the European Community are currently making efforts to establish a system of control which will greatly reduce the risk of this situation reoccurring in the future;Whereas the quantities in question are minor when compared to the total level of imports into the European Community of the corresponding products and that therefore there would be no risk of market disruption if the goods were released into free circulation;Whereas Article 8 of Regulation (EEC) No 3030/93 allows the Commission to open up additional opportunities for imports under particular circumstances;Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Textile Committee,HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:Article 1 The following quantities shall be made available to allow the release into free circulation of products for which Indonesia has issued 1996 export licences:>TABLE>Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.Done at Brussels, 26 March 1997.For the CommissionLeon BRITTANVice-President(1) OJ No L 275, 8. 11. 1993, p. 1.(2) OJ No L 26, 29. 1. 1997, p. 8.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1195/97 by Ernesto CACCAVALE to the Commission. Structural Funds: risks for Campania
Date: 1997-03-26
Institutions: CACCAVALE, European Parliament
Subjects: Structural Funds, administrative formalities, regions of Italy, use of aid













EUR-Lex - 91997E1195 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1195

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1195/97 by Ernesto CACCAVALE to the Commission. Structural Funds: risks for Campania  


Official Journal C 373 , 09/12/1997 P. 0084 





WRITTEN QUESTION P-1195/97 by Ernesto Caccavale (UPE) to the Commission (26 March 1997)Subject: Structural Funds: risks for CampaniaAccording to the figures issued by the Italian State General Accounting Department, during the period 1994-1999 Campania committed 16% of its Structural Fund appropriations and spent 2.5% of them, making it the European region with the lowest level of Structural Fund spending.Nothwithstanding an improvement in this trend, it seems clear that the Region of Campania, having lost LIT 600 billion in the previous period, risks losing no less substantial a sum this time.Does the Commission intend to clarify whether the Region of Campania risks losing its Structural Fund money and, if so, how much?Is it possible, in the Commission's view, to extend the period laid down for the spending provided for?Does the Commission intend to ask the Government to cut the red tape binding the Region of Campania in order to increase its Structural Fund spending?Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (24 April 1997)The Commission can confirm that the 1994-99 operational programme for Campania is suffering from serious implementation delays and that there is consequently a real risk that it might lose the resources made available to the programme by the Structural Funds. The total amount of Community assistance involved amounts to ECU 1 327.9 million.The Commission does not intend to extend the Structural Fund programmes for the current programming period.In 1995, the Commission concluded an agreement with the Italian Government and regions, concerning a series of measures designed to improve and speed up the implementation of Structural Fund assistance in Italy. One of the principal measures involves an undertaking by the national government and the regions to simplify the procedures for preparing and implementing assistance. The Commission is making sure that this undertaking is honoured and continues to insist that the Italian authorities take specific steps to implement it.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1152/97 by Florus WIJSENBEEK to the Commission. Use of lead shot and clay pigeons at rifle ranges
Date: 1997-03-26
Institutions: European Parliament, WIJSENBEEK
Subjects: Netherlands, hunting, lead, soil pollution













EUR-Lex - 91997E1152 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1152

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1152/97 by Florus WIJSENBEEK to the Commission. Use of lead shot and clay pigeons at rifle ranges  


Official Journal C 373 , 09/12/1997 P. 0078 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1152/97 by Florus Wijsenbeek (ELDR) to the Commission (26 March 1997)Subject: Use of lead shot and clay pigeons at rifle rangesIs the Commission aware that not inconsiderable pollution of the soil is caused by the use of clay pigeons compression-moulded from petroleum products (polycyclical aromatic hydrocarbons, or PAHs) and by lead shot?Is the Commission also aware that there are alternatives to both products which would eliminate this pollution, or at least reduce it to a minimum: for example, the clay pigeons manufactured by Auramatrix Ifo O.Y. and shot cartridges made of bismuth, zinc or steel?Is the Commission also aware that the Netherlands has entered into an agreement with the NBVS (the Netherlands association of rifle-range owners) whereby the use of lead shot will continue to be permitted for a maximum of 15 years and the land covered by this agreement will eventually be cleared (after 30 years at the latest)?Does the Commission feel it is possible to introduce this measures at European level (in the Netherlands it will take the form of an administrative order) and does it intend to take any initiatives in this respect?If so, in what way? If not, why not?Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (25 April 1997)The Commission does not view the problem raised by the Honorable Member as requiring action at Community level.The Commission does therefore not intend to take any initiative in this area.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1151/97 by Lucio MANISCO to the Commission. Conservation of the architectural features of the Isola Tiberina in Rome
Date: 1997-03-26
Institutions: European Parliament, MANISCO
Subjects: EU programme, Italy, architectural heritage, building speculation, cultural heritage, cultural policy, heritage protection













EUR-Lex - 91997E1151 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1151

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1151/97 by Lucio MANISCO to the Commission. Conservation of the architectural features of the Isola Tiberina in Rome  


Official Journal C 373 , 09/12/1997 P. 0077 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1151/97 by Lucio Manisco (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (26 March 1997)Subject: Conservation of the architectural features of the Isola Tiberina in RomeThe Isola Tiberina is in the heart of Rome and is one of its main attractions. The complex of buildings on it belongs to the shared architectural heritage not only of the Union but of the world as a whole. One of the buildings is the Palazzo Pierleoni Caetani, a former Franciscan convent, which is to house the 'Historical Museum of the Isola Tiberina'. However, this building is now the subject of property speculation, as reported by CODACONS.1. Is the Commission aware of the facts set out above?2. Does the Commission agree that the current property speculation is damaging a protected building, which is part of the heritage not only of the citizens of Rome, but of all Union citizens?3. What steps does the Commission intend to take to ensure that Rome city council abides by its commitments to safeguard what is part of Europe's cultural heritage?Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (7 May 1997)The Commission is aware of the historical, architectural and cultural significance of the Isola Tiberina in Rome and in particular of the Palazzo Pierleoni Caetani and furthermore agrees with the Honourable Member that it should be preserved and enhanced for the benefit of the European citizens and the international public in general. Furthermore, although the Commission is not aware of the property speculation, it is concerned that it could have negative effects on the protection of the monument.However, and as the Honourable Member is aware, in accordance with Article 128 of the EC Treaty the responsibility for the protection and preservation of cultural heritage lies exclusively within the competence of the national authorities. In this context, it is the responsibility of the Italian authorities to take any appropriate measure for the protection of the Palazzo Pierleoni Caetani.On the other hand, the role of the Community is to encourage cooperation between the Member States and if necessary to support and supplement their action in favour of the conservation and safeguarding of cultural heritage of European significance in the framework of the Commission's action in the field as, for example, its pilot actions in preparation of the Raphael programme, which has not, as yet, been adopted by the competent institutions ((COM(96) 627. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1210/97 by Peter SKINNER to the Commission. Cost/benefit analysis methodology discussions in the Commission
Date: 1997-03-26
Institutions: European Parliament, SKINNER
Subjects: European Commission, application of EU law, cost-benefit analysis, impact study, invitation to tender, provision of services, public contract, self-employed person













EUR-Lex - 91997E1210 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1210

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1210/97 by Peter SKINNER to the Commission. Cost/benefit analysis methodology discussions in the Commission  


Official Journal C 367 , 04/12/1997 P. 0098 





WRITTEN QUESTION P-1210/97 by Peter Skinner (PSE) to the Commission (26 March 1997)Subject: Cost/benefit analysis methodology discussions in the CommissionCan Mr Santer please make public an account of the discussions presently at hand in the Commission on cost/benefit analysis and impact assessment? What tendering process has been carried out to employ consultants or experts to advise the Commission on these issues? I refer in particular to the contractual status or agreement of former members of the Molitor group. Considering that the Molitor group has now finalized its report, under what status are former members of this group now participating in Commission discussions? To what extent have the social partners and other interest groups representing all sectors of society been involved in these discussions?Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (23 April 1997)Since the adoption on 16 January 1996 of its general guidelines on legislative policy, referred to in the 'Better lawmaking' reports ((CSE(96) 7. CSE(95) 580. )), the Commission has taken steps to rationalize and modernize its impact assessments. This work does indeed involve consideration of the possibilities of introducing cost-benefit analysis methodology.The Commission is open to the views of various sectors of the economy and society, and is examining the experiences of the various national authorities, while taking into account the views of individual experts.When the Commission concludes service contracts, it complies with Community legislation on procurement. To date, no contract has been awarded to former members of the independent group of experts on legislative and administrative simplification, known as the Molitor group.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1165/97 by Richard HOWITT to the Commission. Use of Leonardo funds to support training for firefighters
Date: 1997-03-26
Institutions: European Parliament, HOWITT
Subjects: EU financing, EU programme, engineer, fire protection, public health, public safety, vocational training













EUR-Lex - 91997E1165 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1165

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1165/97 by Richard HOWITT to the Commission. Use of Leonardo funds to support training for firefighters  


Official Journal C 319 , 18/10/1997 P. 0240 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1165/97 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (26 March 1997)Subject: Use of Leonardo funds to support training for firefightersIs the Commission aware of any examples where Leonardo or other EU training funds have been made available to support training of firefighters? Would the Commission welcome such a proposal, given the unique contribution made by Fire Services towards the safety of European citizens?Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (24 April 1997)Currently one project is being supported for the training of firefighters (involving partners from 12 countries) and another to support the training of fire engineers (involving partners from 5 countries). The Commission looks favourably on all proposals submitted in the context of Leonardo which help to mobilise the resources of training organisations in different countries to develop innovative ways of improving the quality of training aimed at securing the safety and health of European citizens.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 574/97 of 26 March 1997 providing for reallocation of import rights under Regulation (EC) No 1382/96 opening and providing for the administration of an import tariff quota for frozen beef intended for processing
Date: 1997-03-26
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: beef, customs duties, food processing, frozen product, import, tariff quota













EUR-Lex - 31997R0574 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



31997R0574

Commission Regulation (EC) No 574/97 of 26 March 1997 providing for reallocation of import rights under Regulation (EC) No 1382/96 opening and providing for the administration of an import tariff quota for frozen beef intended for processing  


Official Journal L 085 , 27/03/1997 P. 0063 - 0063 





COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 574/97 of 26 March 1997 providing for reallocation of import rights under Regulation (EC) No 1382/96 opening and providing for the administration of an import tariff quota for frozen beef intended for processingTHE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1382/96 of 17 July 1996 opening and providing for the administration of an import tariff quota for frozen beef intended for processing (1), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 573/97 (2), and in particular Article 6 (2) thereof,Whereas Regulation (EC) No 1382/96 provides for the opening of a tariff quota for 51 050 tonnes of frozen beef intended for processing from 1 July 1996 to 30 June 1997; whereas Article 6 of that Regulation provides for the reallocation of unused import rights on the basis of the actual utilization of import rights for A-products and B-products respectively by the end of February 1997,HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:Article 1 1. The quantities referred to in Article 6 (1) of Regulation (EC) No 1382/96 amount to 28 096 tonnes.2. The breakdown referred to in Article 6 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1382/96 shall be as follows:- 27 996 tonnes intended for A-products,- 100 tonnes intended for B-products.Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.Done at Brussels, 26 March 1997.For the CommissionFranz FISCHLERMember of the Commission(1) OJ No L 179, 18. 7. 1996, p. 12.(2) See page 62 of this Official Journal.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1159/97 by Richard HOWITT to the Commission. European Commission Mobile Information Display
Date: 1997-03-26
Institutions: European Parliament, HOWITT
Subjects: EU publication, European Commission, European Parliament, Member of the European Parliament, access to EU information, dissemination of EU information, teaching













EUR-Lex - 91997E1159 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1159

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1159/97 by Richard HOWITT to the Commission. European Commission Mobile Information Display  


Official Journal C 391 , 23/12/1997 P. 0045 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1159/97 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (26 March 1997)Subject: European Commission Mobile Information DisplayWhy is it, when the Commission's Mobile Information Display visited Southend College in my constituency on 6-7 March 1997, there was no information available on Members of the European Parliament and their role? Is it that the Commission does not consider the Parliament an equal partner in the European Union? Or is it that in an information display comprising a 30-tonne lorry there was insufficient space to include information on MEPs?Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (6 May 1997)The mobile information centre to which the Honourable Member refers did indeed visit South East Essex college in Southend-on-Sea on 6 March 1997. His presence in the mobile information centre attracted a well above average number of members of the public and was very much appreciated. There were an adequate number of relevant publications but perhaps they were not sufficiently brought to the attention of the Honourable Member.The publications carried on board the mobile information centre are selected in order to satisfy the information needs of those visiting the vehicle. School and college students need to understand the functioning of all the European institutions and the roles of their representatives at a European level. Accordingly, the following publications which contain detailed information on the Parliament and MEPs are always included on board the mobile information centre:Parliament publications:The European Parliament Your Voice in Europe Europe at a Glance Constituency leaflet (lists MEPs and includes map of institutions of European constituencies in the United Kingdom) United in DemocracyCommission publications:Your ministers decide on Europe (fact sheet) Europe in ten points The ABC of Community law Working together: the institutions of the CommunityA copy of the video 'the Parliament at work' is given to each school and college visited. The European profiles CD-ROM, which provides detailed information on the Parliament and a profile of each United Kingdom MEP, is also available.