do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1664/97 by David BOWE to the Commission. End of life vehicles
Date: 1997-05-20
Institutions: BOWE, European Parliament
Subjects: EC Directive, proposal (EU), road traffic, vehicle

22. 1. 98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 21/79

The  Member  States  having  delivered  a  favourable  opinion,  the  Commission  will  commit  the  necessary
appropriations from budget heading B7-410 in line with the remarks on this subject contained in the 1997 budget.
Recruitment  of  technical  assistance  personnel  will  be  by  invitation  to  tender  pursuant  to  Council  Regulation
1488/96 (Meda) (1) and in accordance with the procedures laid down in the Financial Regulation applicable to the
General Budget of the European Communities.

(1)  OJ L 189, 30.7.1996.

(98/C 21/173)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1659/97

by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) and Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

Subject: The future of the Community Support Framework

(14 May 1997)

Given that supplementary resources will very likely be required to complete many of the projects in the southern
Member States financed by the Cohesion Fund and the Structural Funds, and in the light of reports from DG XVI
that the Commissioner responsible intends to organize a conference to hear Member States(cid:146) views on the volume
of funding, will the Commission say whether it has analysed the long-term investments needed to complete the
projects  included  in  the  Second  Community  Support  Framework,  and  whether  it  already  has  some  general
notions about how to organize such funding?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(8 July 1997)

The Commission intends, shortly after completion of the intergovernmental conference, to table broad proposals
for the future financing of the Community and for policy in the area of economic and social cohesion after 1999.
It appears that the least prosperous regions of the Community should remain the main beneficiaries of structural
assistance. Support for regions, including rural areas, experiencing structural adjustment difficulties in the more
prosperous Member States and for the adaptation of human resources should also be continued.

Although it is difficult to give a detailed indication of the proposals the Commission will make, the system of
structural and cohesion funds must, in any event, be directed towards more concentration, greater simplification
and increased effectiveness.

(98/C 21/174)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1664/97

by David Bowe (PSE) to the Commission

(20 May 1997)

Subject: End of life vehicles

Why can the Commission not finalise its draft proposal for a Directive on end of life vehicles?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(2 July 1997)

The  Commission  intends  to  adopt  a  proposal  for  a  directive  on  end  of  life  vehicles  before  the  summer.  The
Commission is now finalising the text which includes a number of technical, economic and organisational issues
requiring thorough consideration.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1697/97 by Ria OOMEN-RUIJTEN to the Commission. Frontier workers
Date: 1997-05-20
Institutions: European Parliament, OOMEN-RUIJTEN
Subjects: Netherlands, disability insurance, free movement of workers, frontier worker, residence, social security













EUR-Lex - 91997E1697 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1697

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1697/97 by Ria OOMEN-RUIJTEN to the Commission. Frontier workers  


Official Journal C 373 , 09/12/1997 P. 0156 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1697/97 by Ria Oomen-Ruijten (PPE) to the Commission (20 May 1997)Subject: Frontier workers1. Is the Commission aware of the proposals by the Netherlands State Secretary of Social Affairs and Public Health concerning a review of Royal Decree 164?2. Has the Commission been in contact with the Netherlands government on this matter?3. Is exclusion from national insurance in the Netherlands of persons entitled to disability benefits who are not resident in the Netherlands compatible with regulation 1408/71 and relevant decisions of the Court of Justice?Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (5 June 1997)1. The Commission has been informed, by former frontier workers, of the Netherlands government's intention to amend Royal Decree No 164, particularly as regards the position of this category of persons under the general insurance scheme in the Netherlands. It is suggested that the Netherlands government plans to impose a residence condition on fully disabled former frontier workers, thus excluding them from the insurance scheme.2. The Commission has contacted the Netherlands authorities to obtain their point of view on the question of whether the exclusion of fully disabled former frontier workers from the general insurance scheme is compatible with Community law.3. On the basis of the replies received from the Netherlands authorities, the Commission will examine the matter in detail. In this connection the Commission would like to draw the Honourable Member's attention to Article 13 (2) (f) of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 ((OJ L 149, 5.7.1971. )), which would allow a Member State in whose territory a person has worked to impose a residence requirement on such a person, provided that he or she has irrevocably ceased all occupational activity. However, the interpretation of this provision is currently being examined by the Court of Justice, under Case C-275/96 (Kuusijärvi), and it would be appropriate to take the Court's ruling into consideration.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1795/97 by Luciano VECCHI to the Commission. Implementation of Decision 96/449/EC on the processing of waste from mammals into meal for use as feed
Date: 1997-05-20
Institutions: European Parliament, VECCHI
Subjects: EC Decision, agricultural waste, animal disease, application of EU law, cattle, waste management, waste recycling













EUR-Lex - 91997E1795 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1795

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1795/97 by Luciano VECCHI to the Commission. Implementation of Decision 96/449/EC on the processing of waste from mammals into meal for use as feed  


Official Journal C 060 , 25/02/1998 P. 0043 





WRITTEN QUESTION P-1795/97 by Luciano Vecchi (PSE) to the Commission (20 May 1997)Subject: Implementation of Decision 96/449/EC on the processing of waste from mammals into meal for use as feedRegarding Decision 96/449/EEC ((OJ L 184, 24.7.1996, p. 43.)), on which I have already tabled two questions to the Commission and which is proving enormously difficult to implement at the practical level in all the Member States, will the Commission clarify the following points:1. Does the protein residue obtained from processed mammal bones (fit for consumption or otherwise) always have to be pressure-treated (3 bar at 133 °C for 20 minutes) in accordance with Decision 96/449/EC in order to be used as animal feed?2. Does the protein residue obtained from rendered mammal fatty tissue (fit for consumption or otherwise) always have to be pressure-treated in the manner laid down in the Decision in order to be used as animal feed?3. What fluid has to be pressurized to generate the 3 bar specified in the Decision, air, nitrogen, carbon dioxide, or water vapour?Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (8 July 1997)1. Commission Decision 96/449/EC requires animal waste to be processed at 3 bar at 133 °C for 20 minutes. This applies to all mammalian animal waste but there are certain exemptions including for bones which are fit for human consumption. Other bones are not exempt.2. The above exemption refers only to bones, and any material which is removed from these bones, whether or not it is fit for human consumption, must be pressure treated unless it is intended that it should go for direct human consumption. Consequently, for use in animal feed it must be treated in accordance with Decision 96/449/EC.3. The liquid used to generate 3 bars pressure as mentioned in the Decision is not specified. However, the normal and most obvious practical method is by the heating of water in a confined vessel which will, by the laws of physics, generate 133 °C at 3 bar. The Commission is unaware of any other system which would give these conditions and which is in practical use.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1700/97 by Ulf HOLM to the Commission. Commission delegations
Date: 1997-05-20
Institutions: European Parliament, HOLM
Subjects: Commission Delegation, European Commission, European Union, European official, administrative expenditure (EU), third country













EUR-Lex - 91997E1700 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1700

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1700/97 by Ulf HOLM to the Commission. Commission delegations  


Official Journal C 021 , 22/01/1998 P. 0084 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1700/97 by Ulf Holm (V) to the Commission (20 May 1997)Subject: Commission delegationsFor several years, the Commission has had a number of offices (delegations) around the world.1. Can it supply a list of all current EU delegations?2. How many delegations there were altogether in 1980, 1985, 1990 and 1995 respectively?3. How many people does each of them now employ?4. What does each of them cost to run?5. What did the delegations cost to run, overall, in 1980, 1985, 1990 and 1995 respectively?Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (24 June 1997)For points 1 and 3, the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the answer already given to written question 1107/97 ((OJ C 319, 18.10.1997, p. 230. )).Point 2: there were 64 delegations and offices in 1980, 82 in 1985, 94 in 1990 and 122 in 1995.It is impossible to give the cost of each individual delegation since the relevant appropriations are entered in chapter A6 of the Commission's budget, where spending is broken down by item.Pre-1988, cost breakdowns were spread over the whole budget and cannot therefore now be isolated. Since 1990, the costs have been entered under chapter A6; they totalled ECU 112 million in 1990 and ECU 191 million in 1995. The increase was due largely to the opening of new Commission delegations in eastern Europe.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1699/97 by Ulf HOLM to the Commission. The agri-environmental scheme
Date: 1997-05-20
Institutions: European Parliament, HOLM
Subjects: Community budget, EAGGF Guarantee Section, EU programme, agricultural production policy, aid to agriculture, environmental protection, terms for aid













EUR-Lex - 91997E1699 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1699

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1699/97 by Ulf HOLM to the Commission. The agri-environmental scheme  


Official Journal C 021 , 22/01/1998 P. 0083 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1699/97 by Ulf Holm (V) to the Commission (20 May 1997)Subject: The agri-environmental schemeFurther to its answer to written question E-0549/97 ((OJ C 319, 18.10.1997, p. 110. )), will the Commission now provide answers to the following questions concerning the regulation on agri-environmental measures?1. Will it provide a list of the countries in which the 117 approved programmes are located?2. How much financial assistance are the 117 programmes receiving from the Community?3. What is the total amount that has been earmarked for this scheme by the Community?4. What requirements must farmers satisfy in order to be able to participate in the agri-environmental scheme?Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (26 June 1997)Agri-environment programmes have been approved in all Member States and by the end of the 1996 budget year implementation had begun in all Member States with the exception of Luxembourg.The Commission is forwarding direct to the Honourable Member and to the Secretariat general of the Parliament a full list of the approved programmes at 31 December 1996. Finance is provided from the Community budget (European agriculture guidance and guarantee fund guarantee section) at the rate of 75% in Objective 1 regions and 50% in all other regions. Full data concerning the budget of each programme up to 1997 are being forwarded separately to the Honourable Member and to the Secretariat general of the Parliament.The funding allocation (Community contribution only) for the first five years of implementation is given below:>TABLE>Programmes are developed and implemented by the Member States or regions, subject to approval by the Commission, and thus the specific conditions vary greatly between programmes. Programmes may comprise detailed obligations relating to the environmental management of land, beneficial farm practices, and the organization of training courses in environmental techniques. Farmers who choose to join programmes are bound to observe the undertakings set out in the relevant programme for the period specified which is at least five years for the land management measures.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1684/97 by Franz LINSER to the Commission. EU contributions/volume of aid
Date: 1997-05-20
Institutions: European Parliament, LINSER
Subjects: Austria, EU aid, Member States' contribution, credit policy, financial aid













EUR-Lex - 91997E1684 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1684

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1684/97 by Franz LINSER to the Commission. EU contributions/volume of aid  


Official Journal C 367 , 04/12/1997 P. 0132 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1684/97 by Franz Linser (NI) to the Commission (20 May 1997)Subject: EU contributions/volume of aidIn Austria different figures are circulating in the media on the actual contribution made by Austria and the amount it receives from the various aid programmes.1. What was Austria's contribution as a Member State in 1996?2. What will the level of contributions be in 1997 and 1998?3. What was the level of funding planned by the Commission which could in theory have returned to Austria?4. What was the level of funding approved by the Commission which could in theory have returned to Austria?5. What funding (broken down by areas of support and budget titles) actually returned to Austria in 1996?6. What is the difference between the theoretical level of funding, the level of funding approved by the EU and the funding which actually returned to Austria in 1996?7. What level of funding not taken up by Austria in 1996 can be transferred to 1997 without being lost?8. What funding not taken up by Austria in 1996 will be lost to Austria?9. What aid for 1997 has Austria so far applied for?10. What aid for 1997 (for Austria) has so far been approved by the Commission?Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (12 June 1997)The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1686/97 by Wolfgang KREISSL-DÖRFLER to the Commission. Exports of old clothes to the Third World
Date: 1997-05-20
Institutions: European Parliament, KREISSL-DOERFLER
Subjects: clothing, clothing industry, developing countries, development aid, donation, export, footwear industry, humanitarian aid













EUR-Lex - 91997E1686 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1686

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1686/97 by Wolfgang KREISSL-DÖRFLER to the Commission. Exports of old clothes to the Third World  


Official Journal C 391 , 23/12/1997 P. 0121 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1686/97 by Wolfgang Kreissl-Dörfler (V) to the Commission (20 May 1997)Subject: Exports of old clothes to the Third WorldDoes the Commission have any information on the number of tonnes of old clothes (and old shoes exported annually from the EU to the Third World? What are the main importing countries?Has the Commission carried out any studies on the effect of these exports on the textile and shoe industries of the importing countries? To what extent is the EU's trade in old clothes in line with the objectives of EU development policy?Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission (25 June 1997)The combined nomenclature on which the Community bases its external trade figures, includes a product code 6309 00 00 for worn clothing. This includes textiles and footwear (loose or bundled) which show clear evidence of previous use, but also covers other items such as bedding and furnishing fabrics. It is not therefore possible to say how much trade old clothes and shoes alone represent.A table listing all Community exports of old clothes and textile items over the past three years is being sent direct to the Honourable Member and Parliament's Secretariat.On average, exports totalled 340 000 tonnes between 1993 and 1995.The Commission is aware of the dangers that such exports may pose to developing economies. However, it does not know of any recent study which demonstrates potential adverse effects on these economies as a result of, say, the end-use of the products (for use as clothing or as the inputs for new production) or on local manufacture or prices.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1674/97 by Roberta ANGELILLI to the Commission. Line C for the Rome underground
Date: 1997-05-20
Institutions: ANGELILLI, European Parliament
Subjects: Latium, administrative transparency, environmental impact, environmental protection, impact study, opinion poll, underground railway, urban construction













EUR-Lex - 91997E1674 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1674

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1674/97 by Roberta ANGELILLI to the Commission. Line C for the Rome underground  


Official Journal C 391 , 23/12/1997 P. 0117 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1674/97 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission (20 May 1997)Subject: Line C for the Rome undergroundI have already tabled two questions on this matter, in May 1996 (E-1508/96 ((OJ C 356, 25.11.1996, p. 48. ))) and March 1997 (E-1271/97 ((OJ C 373, 9.12.1997, p. 98.))), highlighting Rome City Council's failure to carry out an environmental impact assessment, as required by European law, in connection with the construction of line C for the Rome underground.In spite of the enormous technical difficulties standing in the way of completion of the work before the year 2000, Rome City Council has stated that it intends to go ahead with the project submitted, which forms part of the programme of works for the 2000 jubilee, towards which the European Investment Bank is to contribute LIT 1.4 billion.Given the above, would the Commission state whether:1. on 4 December 1996 it forwarded to the Mayor of Rome a letter or request regarding the above matter, and, if it did, whether it will publish the contents thereof?2. it is true that PRAGMA srl, whose head office is located at Via Salaria 290 in Rome, was commissioned by Rome City Council (or by the Co.Tra.L. or some other agency) to conduct opinion polls and enquiries regarding underground line C?3. given that work on the opinion polls started at the end of March 1997, it would agree that such enquiries are in breach of the spirit of Directive 85/337/EEC ((OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40.)), as amended by Directive 97/11/EC ((OJ L 73, 14.3.1997, p. 5.)), which requires inter alia the authorities to ensure public involvement throughout the entire decision-making process?Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (16 June 1997)The letter sent to the Italian authorities is being examined as part of an enquiry which could result in proceedings being instituted against Italy for infringement of Article 169 of the EC Treaty. Its contents may not therefore be divulged.The Honourable Member will in any event be informed of the contents of the reply from the Italian authorities once it reaches the Commission.Regarding the question relating to Pragma srl, the Commission is not aware of the matters the Honourable Member refers to.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1685/97 by Barbara SCHMIDBAUER to the Commission. New layout for the Rond Point Schuman
Date: 1997-05-20
Institutions: European Parliament, SCHMIDBAUER
Subjects: Brussels region, competence of the Member States, facilities for people with disabilities, pedestrian zone, physically disabled person, town planning













EUR-Lex - 91997E1685 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1685

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1685/97 by Barbara SCHMIDBAUER to the Commission. New layout for the Rond Point Schuman  


Official Journal C 391 , 23/12/1997 P. 0121 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1685/97 by Barbara Schmidbauer (PSE) to the Commission (20 May 1997)Subject: New layout for the Rond Point SchumanHas the Commission taken the appropriate measures to ensure access for the disabled now that the Rond Point Schuman has been given a new layout?Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (16 June 1997)The Commission has no jurisdiction in respect of any reorganization of the Rond Point Schuman, which is a matter for the Belgian authorities.The Commission would, however, inform the Honourable Member that the European institutions are involved in organizing and financing an international architectural competition on improving pedestrian facilities in the area around the European institutions.At the instigation of the Commission, supported by the European Parliament, the Council and the Brussels regional authorities, it has been decided that the studies to be carried out should take particular account of the special needs of disabled people.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1669/97 by Anita POLLACK to the Commission. Convention to combat desertification
Date: 1997-05-20
Institutions: European Parliament, POLLACK
Subjects: UN convention, competence of the Member States, desertification, ratification of an agreement













EUR-Lex - 91997E1669 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1669

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1669/97 by Anita POLLACK to the Commission. Convention to combat desertification  


Official Journal C 373 , 09/12/1997 P. 0154 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1669/97 by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission (20 May 1997)Subject: Convention to combat desertificationWhat actions have been taken to encourage Member States to ratify this Convention which entered into force on 26 December 1996, and have any yet done so? Does the EU envisage ratifying it?Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission (6 June 1997)Article 34 of the United Nations Convention to combat desertification requires that Member States and the Community decide on their respective responsibilities for the performance of their obligations under the Convention, and these include ratification. As at 15 May 1997, ten Member States have ratified the Convention. They are Denmark, Germany, Greece, Spain, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, Finland, Sweden and United Kingdom. The Community, for its part, is in the process of ratifying it.