do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1409/97 by Roberta ANGELILLI to the Commission. Draining of the Infernaccio waste-disposal site in Rome
Date: 1997-04-22
Institutions: ANGELILLI, European Parliament
Subjects: Latium, application of EU law, environmental protection, local government, waste disposal, waste management, waste recycling













EUR-Lex - 91997E1409 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1409

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1409/97 by Roberta ANGELILLI to the Commission. Draining of the Infernaccio waste-disposal site in Rome  


Official Journal C 373 , 09/12/1997 P. 0120 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1409/97 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission (22 April 1997)Subject: Draining of the Infernaccio waste-disposal site in RomeIn a council meeting of 7 February 1997, the municipality of Rome earmarked LIT 9.5 billion for draining the Infernaccio waste-disposal site in Rome, district 15, close to the Via della Magliana Vecchia. Many inhabitants of the area have asked for this to be done on a number of occasions relying, inter alia, of a report of 4 October 1993 by the Environmental Protection Office of the Municipality of Rome which refers to the potential risk of environmental pollution in the area due to fracturing containing the waste. So far, however, the drainage work has not begun and the inhabitants of the area think that the amount of money earmarked is not sufficient to drain the whole area, where conditions are, from an environmental point of view, very worrying.The situation at the Infernaccio waste-disposal site appears to be a manifest breach of the provisions of Directive 75/442/EEC ((OJ L 194, 25.7.1975, p. 39. )) on waste, as amended by Directive 91/156/EEC ((OJ L 78, 26.3.1991, p. 32. )), which provides that 'Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that waste is recovered or disposed of without endangering human health and without using processes or methods which could harm the environment ...'.Will the Commission check whether the situation described above involves an infringement of the Community directives on waste disposal and in particular Directives 75/442/EEC and 91/156/EEC?Could the Commission say whether it thinks any action should be taken against Italy or the Municipality of Rome in this matter in order to restore respect for Community law?Joint answer to Written Questions E-1409/97 and E-1410/97 given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (27 May 1997)The Commission will be contacting the Italian authorities on the subject of the fact referred to by the Honourable Member and reminding them of the need to comply with Article 4 of Directive 91/156/EEC, to which the Honourable Member referred.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1414/97 by Honório NOVO to the Commission. Relocation of Grundig Indústria de Portugal's audio products factory in Braga, Portugal
Date: 1997-04-22
Institutions: European Parliament, NOVO
Subjects: EU aid, Northern Portugal, aid system, audiovisual industry, fund (EU), industrial building, investment loan, sale, transfer of businesses













EUR-Lex - 91997E1414 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1414

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1414/97 by Honório NOVO to the Commission. Relocation of Grundig Indústria de Portugal's audio products factory in Braga, Portugal  


Official Journal C 373 , 09/12/1997 P. 0122 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1414/97 by Honório Novo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (22 April 1997)Subject: Relocation of Grundig Indústria de Portugal's audio products factory in Braga, PortugalI thank the Commission for its answer of 9.1.1997 ((OJ C 83, 14.3.1997, p. 131. )) to Written Question P-3533/96 and its supplementary answer of 25.3.1997 ((OJ C 319, 18.10.1997, p. 8. )). However, while awaiting information from the Commission on any sale of Grundig buildings partly constructed with Community funds under Pedip I, I should like to ask the following supplementary questions.What was the 'substantial investment project' submitted by Grundig under Pedip II, which was 'considered ineligible by the selection committee'?What were the characteristics of the project and how much funding was requested?Bearing in mind the recent case of the Renault plant in Vilvoorde, Belgium, is the Commission prepared to approve any arrangements for Community cofunding for Grundig if the latter's intention of closing the plant in Braga and relocating it to Hungary is confirmed?Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission (27 May 1997)The Commission does not hold information on projects considered ineligible by the national selection committees.Commission approval of aid schemes in the Member States is governed by the agreed Community competition rules. Such schemes may be cofinanced by the structural funds if they strengthen economic development in weaker regions without damaging opportunities for growth in the Community as a whole and, thus, contribute to enhancing economic and social cohesion. In this context, any application made by Grundig for support under an aid scheme in a Member State may be considered on the same basis as any other by the authorities responsible.Concerning delocalisations, the Commission informs the Honourable Member that the question will be examined in the context of the forthcoming reform of the structural funds.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1398/97 by Olivier DUPUIS to the Commission. UN Decade for the World's Indigenous People
Date: 1997-04-22
Institutions: DUPUIS, European Parliament
Subjects: EU aid, UNO, development aid, forest conservation, fundamental rights, human rights, indigenous population













EUR-Lex - 91997E1398 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1398

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1398/97 by Olivier DUPUIS to the Commission. UN Decade for the World's Indigenous People  


Official Journal C 367 , 04/12/1997 P. 0122 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1398/97 by Olivier Dupuis (ARE) to the Commission (22 April 1997)Subject: UN Decade for the World's Indigenous PeopleIn the light of the UN Decade for the World's Indigenous People, whose first quarter has almost passed, can the Commission indicate the projects through which it has supported the indigenous peoples of French Guyana in 1995 and 1996?Can the Commission list the names of the projects and the amounts of financial support it has given for all the different financial instruments it has at its disposition to support the indigenous peoples of French Guyana?Does the Commission feel that it has adequately reacted to the resolutions of the UN General Assembly which has called upon states and intergovernmental organizations to promote the rights and interests of the indigenous people living in their territories, as reflected by the title of the Decade: 'Indigenous People: Partners in Action'?Joint answer to Written Questions E-1398/97, E-1399/97 and E-1401/97 given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (29 May 1997)The Commission is contributing to international action to uphold the human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous people.In 1996, it supported the newsletter published by the European Alliance with Indigenous Peoples, whose aim is to inform a target group of people interested in action taken by the Community on issues affecting indigenous people. In October and November 1996, the newsletter published two articles on the position of indigenous peoples in French Guyana and Finland.The Commission has not yet adopted a policy on indigenous peoples and development cooperation. However, a number of Community instruments refer to them specifically and to the need to encourage their participation in development projects. One of the objectives set for the conservation of tropical forests is to improve living standards for local people, as they themselves are crucial to forest conservation.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1410/97 by Roberta ANGELILLI to the Commission. Huge waste-disposal site at Tor Lupara
Date: 1997-04-22
Institutions: ANGELILLI, European Parliament
Subjects: Latium, application of EU law, environmental protection, local government, waste disposal, waste management, waste recycling













EUR-Lex - 91997E1410 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1410

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1410/97 by Roberta ANGELILLI to the Commission. Huge waste-disposal site at Tor Lupara  


Official Journal C 373 , 09/12/1997 P. 0120 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1410/97 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission (22 April 1997)Subject: Huge waste-disposal site at Tor LuparaA number of citizens have recently condemned the worrying situation at a huge waste-disposal site - known as the 'Inviolata site' - at Tor Lupara, between the communes of Guidonia and Mentana near to Rome. The site is located in a very densely populated area and waste converges there from 140 communes. The total surface area of the site has, according to local press reports, now reached three square kilometers.People living in the vicinity have to put up with the nauseating smells emanating from the site and fear that even when it is closed, because of the vast proportions it has assumed, the biogas generated by the fermentation of the waste will continue to be given off into the air for a long time.Moreover, a group of doctors has apparently reported that the area has witnessed an increase in diseases that could have environmentally-related causes.That situation appears to be in manifest breach of the provisions of Article 4 of Directive 75/442/EEC ((OJ L 194, 25.7.1975, p. 39. )) on waste, as amended by Directive 91/156/EEC ((OJ L 78, 26.3.1991, p. 32. )), which provides that 'Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that waste is recovered or dispose of without endangering human health and without using processes or methods which could harm the environment ...'.Could the Commission check whether the situation described above involves an infringement of the Community directives on waste disposal and in particular Directives 75/442/EEC and 91/156/EEC?Could the Commission say whether it thinks any action should be taken against Italy in this matter in order to restore respect for Community law?Joint answer to Written Questions E-1409/97 and E-1410/97 given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (27 May 1997)The Commission will be contacting the Italian authorities on the subject of the fact referred to by the Honourable Member and reminding them of the need to comply with Article 4 of Directive 91/156/EEC, to which the Honourable Member referred.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1403/97 by Concepció FERRER to the Council. 'Fatwa' pronounced against Salman Rushdie
Date: 1997-04-22
Institutions: European Parliament, FERRER
Subjects: EU national, Iran, United Kingdom, censorship, extremism, freedom of expression, human rights, international law, literary profession, religion













EUR-Lex - 91997E1403 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1403

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1403/97 by Concepció FERRER to the Council. 'Fatwa' pronounced against Salman Rushdie  


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





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1403/97 by Concepció Ferrer (PPE) to the Council (22 April 1997)Subject: 'Fatwa' pronounced against Salman RushdieOn the eighth anniversary of the Iranian 'fatwa' pronounced against Salman Rushdie the Khordad-15 Foundation increased reward for his assassination from $2 to 2.5 million dollars.Given that the Iranian Government has failed to response to the EU's call for a solution to be found to the problem, and in view of the fact that the 'fatwa' contravenes the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the principle of sovereignty of states is the Council intending to take further action to find a way of cancelling the 'fatwa' pronounced against Mr Rushdie?Answer (25 September 1997)The attention of the Honourable Member is drawn to the declaration made on 13 February 1997 by the Presidency on the occasion of the 8th anniversary of the "fatwa¨ against Salman Rushdie.The Council's views on Iranian behaviour remain unchanged; and although, under the present circumstances, there is no basis for the continuation of the Critical Dialogue with Iran, it will continue to demand that Iran abide by international law.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1395/97 by Ian WHITE to the Commission. Restrictions on regional development funds (SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER)
Date: 1997-04-22
Institutions: European Parliament, WHITE
Subjects: EU aid, European Regional Development Fund, Vanuatu, airport, civil aviation, development aid, military aircraft, use of aid

C 45/28

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

10. 2. 98

filters  for  liquids,  provided  by  point  6.2(g)  of  the  Annex  to  Commission  Directive  91/659/EEC,  is  intended
primarily to prevent exposure of maintenance workers to airborn asbestos fibres, though it does also avoid the
take-up of fibres in the filtered liquid. This measure complements provisions in Directive 83/477/EEC (1) on the
protection  of  workers  from  asbestos.    The  Commission  furthermore  will  continue  to  study  all  possible  risks
associated with drinking water pipes containing asbestos as part of the work programme on asbestos.

The Commission drew up, in 1993, a draft proposal for a directive to ban asbestos with exemptions. However, no
qualified  majority  could  be  identified  for  the  draft  proposal.  The  Commission  relaunched  discussions  on  the
asbestos  question  with  Member  State  experts  in  1996.  The  last  meetings  were  on  26th  July  1996  and
7th November 1996. The Commission intends to examine, as quickly as possible, all the most recent scientific,
technical and economical analyses in order to review the policy with regard to asbestos.

(1)  OJ L 263, 24.9.1983.

(98/C 45/33)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1395/97

by Ian White (PSE) to the Commission

(22 April 1997)

Subject: Restrictions on regional development funds

Regional development funds were provided for the development of airport facilities at Benbecula in the Western
Isles. this is an airport also used for military purposes, particularly with reference to the Royal Artillery range and
the RAF.

Were any specific restrictions put on the spending of European Union funds on civilian facilities rather than
military ones and, if not, why not?

Supplementary answer
given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(13 August 1997)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the reply it gave to his oral question H-0494/97 during
question time at Parliament(cid:146)s July 1997 part-session (1).

(1)  Debates of the Parliament (July 1997).

(98/C 45/34)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1412/97

by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission

(22 April 1997)

Subject: High-speed trains at Lunghezza

Directive  85/337/EEC (1),  as  recently  amended  by  Directive  97/11/EC (2),  provides  (in  Article  4)  that  an
environmental impact assessment in accordance with Articles 5 to 10 must be carried out in the event of the
construction of (cid:145)lines(cid:146) for long-distance railway traffic (Annex I).

Contrary to the above provision, the Municipality of Rome, together with the Region of Lazio and Iricav, drew
up a works project in January 1996 for a stretch of high-speed line between Rome and Naples at Lunghezza,
Rome.

That plan did not provide for consultation of the area(cid:146)s inhabitants, even though this is required by Directive
85/337.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1402/97 by Concepció FERRER to the Council. Signature of the association agreement with Lithuania
Date: 1997-04-22
Institutions: European Parliament, FERRER
Subjects: Council of the European Union, EU Member State, Estonia, European Parliament, Latvia, Lithuania, association agreement (EU), national parliament, ratification of an agreement













EUR-Lex - 91997E1402 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1402

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1402/97 by Concepció FERRER to the Council. Signature of the association agreement with Lithuania  


Official Journal C 391 , 23/12/1997 P. 0080 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1402/97 by Concepció Ferrer (PPE) to the Council (22 April 1997)Subject: Signature of the association agreement with LithuaniaOn 12 June 1995 a European Agreement was signed in order to establish an association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Lithuania, of the other. On 13 November 1995, certified copies thereof were sent to the parliaments of the EU Member States.Fifteen months after the dispatch of the certified copies of the agreement there are still certain parliaments which have not ratified the association agreement.In view of the importance of the agreement to Lithuania, does the Council not think that action of some kind should be taken in order to urge the Member State parliaments which have not so far done so to ratify the agreement without delay?Answer (14 July 1997)The Europe Association Agreement with Lithuania, like those with Estonia and Latvia, was signed on 12 June 1995. Since then ratification procedures have been initiated at national level. At this stage, on the basis of the notifications sent to the Council Secretariat, the depositary of the Agreement, ratification procedures have been completed in ten Member States.As the Honourable Member will be well aware, each Parliament has its own procedures and practices. Matters proceed at different rates in the various Parliaments. The process of ratifying the Europe Agreements with the Baltic countries is taking much the same time as did the ratification of other agreements such as the Europe Agreements with the other Central and East European countries.Nevertheless, the Council is doing its utmost to draw Member States' attention to the need to speed up ratification of the various outstanding agreements, including the Europe Agreements with the Baltic countries. It would also point out to the Honourable Member that this is an area where Members of the European Parliament could themselves exert a positive influence on their colleagues in the national Parliaments.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1384/97 by Mark WATTS to the Commission. Sale of British goods from French market stalls
Date: 1997-04-22
Institutions: European Parliament, WATTS
Subjects: France, United Kingdom, application of EU law, competition law, free movement of goods, free movement of persons, market access, originating product, sale













EUR-Lex - 91997E1384 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1384

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1384/97 by Mark WATTS to the Commission. Sale of British goods from French market stalls  


Official Journal C 391 , 23/12/1997 P. 0079 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1384/97 by Mark Watts (PSE) to the Commission (22 April 1997)Subject: Sale of British goods from French market stallsIs the Commission aware that it is virtually impossible for British citizens to sell British goods in French street markets because the relevant local authorities say that certain special criteria must be met.What action will the Commission take to ensure that a single market is able to operate for citizens of all countries of the EU without the implementation of complicated local laws?Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (16 June 1997)The Commission has not been informed of the situation to which the Honourable Member refers.With respect to internal market rules, the French local authorities have the right to apply their relevant provisions concerning street markets to British citizens or British goods as long as there is no discrimination by reason of nationality which might impede free movement of persons or goods. Concerning the free movement of goods, it seems that the 'Keck et Mithouard' case law would in such a case be applicable (judgement of 24 November 1993, case C-275/91).The Commission invites the Honourable Member to provide concrete examples of difficulties encountered by British citizens in selling British goods in French street markets in order that it may investigate a possible breach of Community law.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1382/97 by Mark WATTS to the Commission. Mortgage and life insurance rights for non- British nationals in Britain
Date: 1997-04-22
Institutions: European Parliament, WATTS
Subjects: EU Member State, EU national, contract, credit guarantee, credit institution, freedom to provide services, legal domicile, life assurance, mortgage

10. 2. 98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 45/25

The  Commission  may,  after  receiving  the  opinion  of  the  Standing  Veterinary  Committee,  recognize  other
analysis  methods  providing  an  equivalent  level  of  consumer  health  protection.  The  Community  Reference
Laboratory for marine biotoxins is working in close cooperation with the national reference laboratories and the
Commission to identify and validate new analysis techniques not requiring animal tests.

The Commission does not intend to prohibit the analysis techniques laid down in Directive 91/492/EEC until
scientific evidence shows that an equivalent level of consumer health protection can be guaranteed by alternative
techniques.

(1)  OJ L 268, 24.9.1991.

(98/C 45/30)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1382/97

by Mark Watts (PSE) to the Commission

(22 April 1997)

Subject: Mortgage and life insurance rights for non-British nationals in Britain

In families in Britain where the breadwinner is a national of another Member State and currently works in that
state, what rights does that family have to secure a mortgage and obtain life insurance cover in Britain?

Is the Commission aware of any problems which are experienced and what action is taken to ensure that the
single market operates in the field of mortgages and life insurance?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(23 June 1997)

The Commission is not aware of any national provisions precluding the activities referred to in the question.

It  should  be  pointed  out  that,  under  the  Community  Directives  which  give  practical  shape  to  the  freedom  of
establishment  and  the  freedom  to  provide  services  in  the  financial  services  sector,  anyone  may  request  a
mortgage loan and/or life assurance cover from any financial firm (credit institution or life assurance company)
that has been duly authorized in the Community or in the European Economic Area, including one established in
a Member State other than that in which he or she is resident.

Thus anyone in the same position as the family referred to in the question is free to approach any firm that has
been authorized to grant mortgage loans and/or life assurance cover.

But it should be borne in mind that the acceptance or refusal of such a request is a matter for the firm’s own
commercial  judgment.  Before  reaching  a  decision,  the  firm  will  examine  the  different  components  of  the
transaction and may be influenced by the location of the property or the fact that the person in question works and
earns the bulk of his/her income in a Member State other than that in which he/she or the firm approached is
established.

The decision whether or not to conclude such a contract is a matter of commercial judgment over which the
Commission has no influence.