do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1909/97 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. XXVth report on competition policy
Date: 1997-06-04
Institutions: AMADEO, European Parliament
Subjects: European treaties, agreement (EU), competition, competition law, competition policy, cooperation agreement













EUR-Lex - 91997E1909 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1909

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1909/97 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. XXVth report on competition policy  


Official Journal C 391 , 23/12/1997 P. 0142 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1909/97 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (4 June 1997)Subject: XXVth report on competition policyWith reference to the 'XXVth report on competition policy (1995)' (COM(96) 0126 final) and the 'draft Commission notice on cooperation between national competition authorities and the Commission in handling cases falling within the scope of Articles 85 or 86 of the EC Treaty' ((OJ C 262, 10.9.1996, p. 5. )), will the Commission be sufficiently flexible in reconsidering vertical forms of cooperation, which should not necessarily fall under the prohibition in Article 85 of the Treaty of Rome?Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission (18 June 1997)Vertical agreements or restrictions within such agreements are not prohibited as such under the Community competition rules as the Honourable Member seems to assume.In fact,a great number of them either fall outside the scope of Article 85 EC Treaty under the "de minimis¨ notice or are automatically exempted under the block exemption regulations. Agreements falling outside the block exemption regulations can and often are exempted upon individual notification when the conditions of Article 85(3) are met.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1923/97 by David BOWE to the Commission. UNECE Sulphur Protocol
Date: 1997-06-04
Institutions: BOWE, European Parliament
Subjects: Protocol (EU), acid rain, air quality, environmental policy, pollution control measures, sulphur, transfrontier pollution

C 45/124

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

10. 2. 98

(98/C 45/158)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1923/97

by David Bowe (PSE) to the Commission

(4 June 1997)

Subject: UNECE Sulphur Protocol

What does the Commission propose to do to encourage Member States to ratify the UNECE sulphur protocol?

Does  not  the  Commission  agree  that  speedy  ratification  by  Member  States  would  greatly  contribute  to  the
attainment of its acidification reduction targets?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(2 July 1997)

The Commission agrees that speedy ratification of the 1994 sulphur protocol of the Convention on long range
transboundary air pollution would assist delivery of the environmental quality target for acidification. This is
also being stressed in the acidification strategy, in which it is stated that one of the first steps of an ambitious
policy to combat acidification should be to ratify the 1994 sulphur protocol.

There are several reasons for ratification. The Community should demonstrate its commitment with regard to
existing international undertakings. Ratification by at least 16 signatory parties is necessary to make the protocol
operational.  The  protocol  contains  provisions  for  future  reviews  which  provide  the  opportunity  for  more
far-reaching  commitments  that  could  further  contribute  to  meet  the  environmental  quality  targets  of  the
Community. Ratification by the Community would encourage those Member States that have yet not done so to
ratify the protocol.

In light of the above the Commission has submitted a proposal for a Council decision on the conclusion by the
Community of the 1994 sulphur protocol. This proposal was attached to the acidification strategy (1).

(1)  COM(97) 88 final.

(98/C 45/159)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1930/97

by Salvador Garriga Polledo (PPE) to the Commission

(4 June 1997)

Subject: Structural Funds

Will the Commission explain the procedure to be applied with respect to outstanding amounts from the Structural
Funds at the end of the current programming period (1994-1999)?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(15 July 1997)

Payments related to commitments made in the current programming period will continue to be effected after
1999. The Commission responds to payment requests introduced by Member States, which in turn depend on the
progress of programme implementation. The speed with which outstanding commitments are cleared therefore
depends mainly on Member States.

In the grant assistance decisions there exist deadlines for final payments. These deadlines can be prolonged on a
case-by-case basis upon request and when justified.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1904/97 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Green Paper on Education - Training - Research: The obstacles to transnational mobility
Date: 1997-06-04
Institutions: AMADEO, European Parliament
Subjects: EU policy, EU programme, EU publication, economic aid, education, equal treatment, free movement of workers, socially disadvantaged class, vocational training













EUR-Lex - 91997E1904 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1904

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1904/97 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Green Paper on Education - Training - Research: The obstacles to transnational mobility  


Official Journal C 391 , 23/12/1997 P. 0142 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1904/97 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (4 June 1997)Subject: Green Paper on Education - Training - Research: The obstacles to transnational mobilityWith reference to the 'Green Paper on Education - Training - Research: The obstacles to transnational mobility' (COM(96) 0462 final) and with a view to achieving greater social justice, will the Commission give priority to taking, without delay, all the measures needed to ensure that the most deprived are not excluded from the benefits of the Community programmes considered in the Green Paper? Will it also make provision, under line of action No 7, to ensure that the financial circumstances of the participant, or the nuclear family to which he or she belongs, are taken into account when the amounts of financial assistance laid down in the programmes are allocated?Joint answer to Written Questions E-1900/97, E-1901/97, E-1902/97, E-1903/97 and E-1904/97 given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (22 July 1997)In view of the length of its answer, the Commission is sending it direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1919/97 by Ian WHITE to the Commission. Concessions for the learning-disabled
Date: 1997-06-04
Institutions: European Parliament, WHITE
Subjects: apprenticeship, education grant, facilities for people with disabilities, higher education, parking area, physically disabled person, public service, public transport, reduced price, student













EUR-Lex - 91997E1919 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1919

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1919/97 by Ian WHITE to the Commission. Concessions for the learning-disabled  


Official Journal C 373 , 09/12/1997 P. 0159 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1919/97 by Ian White (PSE) to the Commission (4 June 1997)Subject: Concessions for the learning-disabledWould the Commission indicate whether a special card exists which enables learning-disabled students to have access to facilities at reduced prices.Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (27 June 1997)In accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, the provision of special cards giving disabled students access to 'facilities' at reduced prices * e.g. access to public services, transport, cultural establishments, museums, or the various services provided by the education systems * is a matter for the individual Member State.At European level, however, in the field of education, disabled students wishing to study at a university or higher education establishment in another Member State are entitled to the maximum Erasmus mobility grants for higher education within the framework of the 'Socrates' Community action programme.In addition, the Community action has led to harmonisation of the logo on the special parking permits for disabled persons, designed to facilitate access to and reservation of such parking spaces in all Member States. Disabled students receiving 'Erasmus' grants can thus receive them wherever they go within the Community.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1902/97 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Green paper on Education - Training - Research: The obstacles to transnational mobility
Date: 1997-06-04
Institutions: AMADEO, European Parliament
Subjects: EU programme, EU publication, European integration, education, education policy, free movement of workers, language teaching, official language, teaching, vocational training













EUR-Lex - 91997E1902 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1902

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1902/97 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Green paper on Education - Training - Research: The obstacles to transnational mobility  


Official Journal C 391 , 23/12/1997 P. 0142 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1902/97 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (4 June 1997)Subject: Green paper on Education - Training - Research: The obstacles to transnational mobilityWith reference to the 'Green Paper on Education - Training - Research: The obstacles to transnational mobility' (COM(96)462 final),the programmes promoting language learning for young people and adults are pointless unless we think of the future. Efforts must be concentrated on the youngest children, by encouraging the teaching of the Community languages in schools throughout the Community and respecting, as far as possible, freedom of choice of the languages to be learned by pupils.In addition to facilitating the learning of Community languages at school, will the Commission also offer pupils the opportunity of studying subjects which promote European construction and integration?A possible new line of action would be the introduction, in every school throughout the Community, of a specific subject on the general lines set out above which would be common to and identical for all pupils in the Community.Joint answer to Written Questions E-1900/97, E-1901/97, E-1902/97, E-1903/97 and E-1904/97 given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (22 July 1997)In view of the length of its answer, the Commission is sending it direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1924/97 by Anita POLLACK to the Commission. Tigers in India
Date: 1997-06-04
Institutions: European Parliament, POLLACK
Subjects: India, animal life, ecosystem, environmental protection, forest conservation, hunting, protected species, protection of animal life













EUR-Lex - 91997E1924 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1924

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1924/97 by Anita POLLACK to the Commission. Tigers in India  


Official Journal C 391 , 23/12/1997 P. 0143 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1924/97 by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission (4 June 1997)Subject: Tigers in IndiaIn view of continued poaching and the low number of tigers remaining, has the Commission had any discussions with the authorities in India with a view to helping enforcement procedures in Project Tiger reserves?Answer given by Mr Marin on behalf of the Commission (18 June 1997)In its recent communication to the Parliament and Council on an enhanced partnership between India and the Union the Commission indicated that it would give a high priority to encouraging sustainable development. In this light, the Commission therefore shares the Honourable Member's concern at the alarming reports that poachers kill a tiger every day in India.The Commission is concentrating its dialogue with the Indian authorities on establishing a suitable framework for environmental protection of all species, not only of tigers, given the close inter-connection of the ecosphere.Specifically the Commission is keen to see local populations mobilised to participate in the protection of their natural heritage. Without this local support, game wardens will always be insufficiently equipped to combat poachers. Hence the Commission has launched a mission to examine how it can actively support the development of joint management of forests (involving civil society and the relevant authorities). Although saving the tiger is not the immediate objective of this initiative, it is hoped that it will help to preserve the tiger and numerous other endangered species as well, and at the same time, provide all the other services and benefits of well managed forest to the people living nearby.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1930/97 by Salvador GARRIGA POLLEDO to the Commission. Structural Funds
Date: 1997-06-04
Institutions: European Parliament, GARRIGA POLLEDO
Subjects: EU Member State, EU financing, EU programme, European Commission, Structural Funds, commitment of expenditure, payment

C 45/124

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

10. 2. 98

(98/C 45/158)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1923/97

by David Bowe (PSE) to the Commission

(4 June 1997)

Subject: UNECE Sulphur Protocol

What does the Commission propose to do to encourage Member States to ratify the UNECE sulphur protocol?

Does  not  the  Commission  agree  that  speedy  ratification  by  Member  States  would  greatly  contribute  to  the
attainment of its acidification reduction targets?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(2 July 1997)

The Commission agrees that speedy ratification of the 1994 sulphur protocol of the Convention on long range
transboundary air pollution would assist delivery of the environmental quality target for acidification. This is
also being stressed in the acidification strategy, in which it is stated that one of the first steps of an ambitious
policy to combat acidification should be to ratify the 1994 sulphur protocol.

There are several reasons for ratification. The Community should demonstrate its commitment with regard to
existing international undertakings. Ratification by at least 16 signatory parties is necessary to make the protocol
operational.  The  protocol  contains  provisions  for  future  reviews  which  provide  the  opportunity  for  more
far-reaching  commitments  that  could  further  contribute  to  meet  the  environmental  quality  targets  of  the
Community. Ratification by the Community would encourage those Member States that have yet not done so to
ratify the protocol.

In light of the above the Commission has submitted a proposal for a Council decision on the conclusion by the
Community of the 1994 sulphur protocol. This proposal was attached to the acidification strategy (1).

(1)  COM(97) 88 final.

(98/C 45/159)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1930/97

by Salvador Garriga Polledo (PPE) to the Commission

(4 June 1997)

Subject: Structural Funds

Will the Commission explain the procedure to be applied with respect to outstanding amounts from the Structural
Funds at the end of the current programming period (1994-1999)?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(15 July 1997)

Payments related to commitments made in the current programming period will continue to be effected after
1999. The Commission responds to payment requests introduced by Member States, which in turn depend on the
progress of programme implementation. The speed with which outstanding commitments are cleared therefore
depends mainly on Member States.

In the grant assistance decisions there exist deadlines for final payments. These deadlines can be prolonged on a
case-by-case basis upon request and when justified.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1951/97 by Susan WADDINGTON to the Commission. Recommendation on homeworking
Date: 1997-06-04
Institutions: European Parliament, WADDINGTON
Subjects: EC recommendation, European Commission, International Labour Organisation, home working, labour law, teleworking













EUR-Lex - 91997E1951 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1951

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1951/97 by Susan WADDINGTON to the Commission. Recommendation on homeworking  


Official Journal C 021 , 22/01/1998 P. 0125 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1951/97 by Susan Waddington (PSE) to the Commission (4 June 1997)Subject: Recommendation on homeworkingGiven the Commission's renewed commitment to bring forward a Recommendation on Homeworking in early 1997 ((Social Europe - progress report on the implementation of the medium-term social action programme, supplement 4/96, p. 42. )) that would encourage Member States to implement the recently agreed ILO Convention on Homeworking and give protection to thousands of homeworkers across the EU, how far has the Commission succeeded in developing such a proposal, do barriers exist within the Commission to such a proposal and when is the Commission likely to adopt such a proposal given that it is now the second quarter of 1997?Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (11 July 1997)As pointed out by the Honourable Member, the Commission has committed itself, in its progress report on the implementation of the medium-term social action programme (1995-97) ((Social Europe 4/96, p. 42. )), to presenting a recommendation on homeworking.The Commission is currently considering the most appropriate initiative in the light of International Labour Organisation (ILO) Convention No 177 and the accompanying Recommendation.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1954/97 by Ian WHITE to the Commission. Commission response to petitions no 1138/95 and 1184/95 on Toxic Shock Syndrome
Date: 1997-06-04
Institutions: European Parliament, WHITE
Subjects: EU Member State, allergy, exchange of information, petition, toxic substance













EUR-Lex - 91997E1954 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1954

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1954/97 by Ian WHITE to the Commission. Commission response to petitions no 1138/95 and 1184/95 on Toxic Shock Syndrome  


Official Journal C 391 , 23/12/1997 P. 0145 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1954/97 by Ian White (PSE) to the Commission (4 June 1997)Subject: Commission response to petitions no 1138/95 and 1184/95 on Toxic Shock SyndromeWould the Commission advise whether:1. A deadline was set when asking Member States for information on TSS, and if so, what date was given?2. How many and which Member States have replied to date?3. Whether any information is available yet?Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (3 July 1997)1. The letter of 18 September 1996 asking Member States for information did not specify a deadline.2. To date, nine Member States have replied: Denmark, Germany, Spain, France, Ireland, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Austria and Sweden.3. The Honourable Member is referred to the additional information provided in connection with petitions Nos 1138/95 from Mrs Paula Power and 1184/95 from Mr Peter Kilvert.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1943/97 by Mark WATTS to the Commission. Church aided schools
Date: 1997-06-04
Institutions: European Parliament, WATTS
Subjects: Treaty on European Union, access to education, competence of the Member States, denominational education, financing, national law, organisation of teaching, private education, teaching













EUR-Lex - 91997E1943 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1943

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1943/97 by Mark WATTS to the Commission. Church aided schools  


Official Journal C 045 , 10/02/1998 P. 0127 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1943/97 by Mark Watts (PSE) to the Commission (4 June 1997)Subject: Church aided schoolsWhilst church-aided schools exist throughout the EU, there is some concern over the right of some groups to run seemingly public establishments that are in reality catering for a few.Can the Commission answer the following questions:1. Do the Articles of the EU Treaty allow for the exclusion of tax payers from facilities they have contributed to (other than those related to defence and national security)?2. Does the EU Treaty ensure the openness of facilities to those who pay for them?3. Should entry to establishments be restricted (legally) and if so, could the Commission please specify the ground on which exclusions should be based?Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission (30 June 1997)As provided by Article 126 of the EC Treaty, Member States have the exclusive responsibility for the content of teaching and for the organisation of educational systems. Church-aided schools or other private schools exist in various Member States. Their funding and the modalities of access to these schools are provided by the authorities according to national provisions and legislation. The Commission does not have any competence in this area.