do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2263/97 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. European cooperation in Brazil
Date: 1997-07-02
Institutions: AMADEO, European Parliament
Subjects: Brazil, European Social Fund, European cooperation, aid to disadvantaged groups, child protection, environmental protection, non-governmental organisation, social policy

C 45/164

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

10. 2. 98

The Commission has been supporting a small number of projects in third countries on an experimental basis in
the framework of the pilot action of European voluntary service. In this context, young volunteers have had the
opportunity  to  take  part  in  social,  environmental,  cultural  and  humanitarian  activities  coordinated  by
non-governmental organisations. However, the Commission does not feel that it would be appropriate to involve
young volunteers in humanitarian operations in war or crisis zones.

The  Commission  agrees  with  the  Honourable  Member  that  experience  acquired  through  European  voluntary
service can help to facilitate the integration of young people into active life. It offers a new kind of informal
educational  experience,  which  is  complementary  to  existing  training  and  work  experience  programmes  at
national and European level.

With regard to social protection issues, the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to his
written question E-2727/96 (1).

(1)  OJ C 60, 26.2.1997.

(98/C 45/216)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2263/97

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(2 July 1997)

Subject: European cooperation in Brazil

Will  the  Commission  provide  information  on  cooperation  projects  it  has  managed  via  NGOs  or  under  the
Structural Funds and the ESF and which have been implemented recently, are under way or are to be carried out
in Brazil?

Answer given by Mr Mar(cid:14)·n on behalf of the Commission

(22 July 1997)

A  number  of  Commission-funded  projects  undertaken  with  Brazil  are  carried  out  by  European  or  Brazilian
non-governmental organisations (NGOs). Most are either social or environmental in nature.

It should be pointed out that neither the Structural Funds nor the European Social Fund offer scope for projects in
Brazil.

Three kinds of project are carried out via NGOs:

›  schemes  of  a  primarily  social  nature  (rural  projects,  support  for  agricultural  training  centres,  youth

organisations, women(cid:146)s projects, health etc.), which are selected on their merits;

› 

the projects making up the three-year programmes for street children and disadvantaged groups: the first,
which covers four cities (Rio, Recife, Salvador and Belo Horizonte) is already under way, while the second,
which is focused on disadvantaged groups in Rio and Sa(cid:152)o Paulo, is in the process of being set up;

› 

individual environment projects or the projects making up the Amazonia pilot programme.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2280/97 by Hedy d'ANCONA to the Commission. Comenius project
Date: 1997-07-02
Institutions: D'ANCONA, European Parliament
Subjects: EU financing, EU programme, European Movement, European cooperation, action programme, education policy, educational institution, university

10. 2. 98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 45/165

(98/C 45/217)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2264/97

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(2 July 1997)

Subject: European cooperation in Mozambique

Will  the  Commission  provide  information  on  cooperation  projects  it  has  managed  via  NGOs  or  under  the
Structural Funds and the ESF and which have been implemented recently, are under way or are to be carried out
in Mozambique?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission

(23 July 1997)

The Commission’s programme in Mozambique is a very large one.

The Commission refers the Honourable Member to the annual report on cooperation with Mozambique which
contains the details sought. The reports are available to Parliament and the most recent are sent direct to the
Honourable Member and to Parliament(cid:146)s Secretariat.

The Honourable Member will appreciate that the structural funds do not apply outside the Community.

(98/C 45/218)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2280/97

by Hedy d(cid:146)Ancona (PSE) to the Commission

(2 July 1997)

Subject: Comenius project

1.

2.

By what percentage has the budget for the Comenius project been cut this year per country?

Is it true that the reduction is ca. 30% for the Netherlands?

Is this reduction a result of the fact that in the past the smaller EU countries have been able to use the
3.
budgets allocated to them, whereas the larger EU countries have had much greater problems? If so, what is the
policy behind imposing reductions on the budgets of countries which have been successful in implementing EU
rules?

4. What  are  the  likely  consequences  of  the  cuts  on  the  programme  in  the  Netherlands,  which  has  been
successful hitherto?

How  do  these  cuts  tie  in  with  the  enthusiastic  response  of  the  Commission  hitherto  to  the  success  of

5.
European exchange policy on education?

Is the Commission or the Council considering action to offset the likely detrimental effects of the cuts and,

6.
if so, what form will that action take?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(22 July 1997)

The budget allocated to the Member States and participating third countries for Comenius action 1 in 1996 and
1997  is  indicated  in  a  table  sent  direct  to  the  Honourable  Member  and  to  the  Parliament(cid:146)s  secretariat.  The
reduction in 1997 is due to a reduction in the total budget attributed to Socrates (198.04 MECU in 1996 compared
to 171.45 MECU in 1997).
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2239/97 by Richard HOWITT to the Commission. Organic food
Date: 1997-07-02
Institutions: European Parliament, HOWITT
Subjects: EU aid, agricultural product, common agricultural policy, environmental protection, foodstuff, organic farming, product quality, production aid













EUR-Lex - 91997E2239 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E2239

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2239/97 by Richard HOWITT to the Commission. Organic food  


Official Journal C 082 , 17/03/1998 P. 0047 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2239/97 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (2 July 1997)Subject: Organic foodFollowing representations from a business in my constituency, is the Commission aware that 60 per cent of organic food sales in Britain are met by imports because no local supply is available?Does the Commission have similar figures for other EU countries?What assistance is provided through the common agricultural policy to stimulate the production of organic foods in Member States?Could the Commission provide information of schemes within individual states which also stimulate organic food production?Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (4 September 1997)The Commission has no detailed data on the quantities of organic products imported from third countries into the Community. In the framework of Article 11 of Regulation (EEC) No 2092/91 on organic production of agricultural products and indications referring thereto on agricultural products and foodstuffs ((OJ L 198, 22.7.1991. )), only qualitative information relating in particular to the nature of the imported products and the inspection arrangements in the third countries, are exchanged between the Member States and the Commission.The common agricultural policy (CAP) support mechanisms do not differentiate in principle between agricultural products from conventional production and those from organic production, and in fact they support both methods of production. However, since it is a method which is favourable for the environment, the organic production method is well placed to benefit from the financial support mechanisms in Regulation (EEC) No 2078/92, on agricultural production methods compatible with the requirements of the protection of the environment and the maintenance of the countryside ((OJ L 215, 30.7.1992. )).Moreover, organic production is supported by the regime of Regulation (EEC) No 2092/91, which creates a framework of fair competition to the benefit of the organic producers, and a credibility for the organic products among consumers.Beyond the measures accepted by the Commission in the framework of Regulation (EEC) No 2078/92, the Commission has no detailed and systematic information on further support mechanisms in the individual Member States.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2272/97 by Patricia McKENNA to the Commission. Proposal for a Commission White Paper on arms trade
Date: 1997-07-02
Institutions: European Parliament, MCKENNA
Subjects: arms industry, arms trade, code of conduct, drafting of EU law, export monitoring, third country

11. 3. 98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 76/89

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(4 September 1997)

The Commission is aware of the problem raised by the Honourable Member. Following the resolution adopted
by Parliament on 13 May, the Commission has adopted a proposal for a Parliament and Council Directive on the
legal protection of conditional access services. (1)

(1)  COM(97) 356 final.

(98/C 76/181)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2272/97

by Patricia McKenna (V) to the Commission

(2 July 1997)

Subject: Proposal for a Commission White Paper on arms trade

In  May  1997  Parliament  adopted  a  report  by  British  Socialist  MEP  Gary  Titley  on  the  Commission
communication on the challenges facing the European defence-related industry (A4-0076/97).

The report suggested that the Commission draft a White Paper on the arms trade and encourage the EU Council
of Ministers to draft a legally binding code of conduct on EU arms exports to third countries.

What progress has the Commission made in implementing Parliament(cid:146)s suggestion? When is the White Paper
likely to be published?

Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission

(4 September 1997)

During discussion of the Titley report the Commission gave its wholehearted support to the suggestion that it
prepare a white paper on arms exports incorporating a legally binding code of conduct.

The report highlights the complexity and importance of arms exports in what is an area of national sovereignty
controlled by national governments where Member States have very different interests and sensitivities.

Criteria  governing  arms  exports  have  been  adopted  at  European  Union  level  but  responsibility  for  their
implementation lies solely with the Member States. The Commission will need more information about national
controls  of  arms  exports  for  progress  to  be  made  in  simplifying  controls  on  transfers  of  arms  within  the
Community.

In  its  conclusions  the  Amsterdam  European  Council  called  for  swift  action  to  be  taken  within  the  European
Union to develop a (cid:145)responsible and coherent arms export control policy(cid:146). The Commission will draw on the
work undertaken within this framework to draft the white paper on arms exports which it has agreed to present to
Parliament.

(98/C 76/182)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2273/97

by Susan Waddington (PSE) to the Commission

(2 July 1997)

Subject: Transportation and storage of nuclear waste

Following recent public demonstrations against the transportation and storage of nuclear waste in Germany, the
Commission must be aware of the growing public concern surrounding such activity in all Member States.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1279/97 of 2 July 1997 amending Regulation (EC) No 616/97 concerning the amounts of early marketing premium for veal calves
Date: 1997-07-02
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: aid system, aid to agriculture, beef, calf, slaughter of animals













EUR-Lex - 31997R1279 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



31997R1279

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1279/97 of 2 July 1997 amending Regulation (EC) No 616/97 concerning the amounts of early marketing premium for veal calves  


Official Journal L 175 , 03/07/1997 P. 0008 - 0008 





COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1279/97 of 2 July 1997 amending Regulation (EC) No 616/97 concerning the amounts of early marketing premium for veal calvesTHE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2222/96 of 18 November 1996 amending Regulation (EEC) No 805/68 on the common organisation of the market in beef and veal (1), and in particular Article 2 thereof,Whereas Article 50 (3) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3886/92 of 23 December 1992 laying down detailed rules for the application of the premium schemes provided for in Council Regulation (EEC) No 805/68 on the common organization of the market in beef and repealing Regulations (EEC) No 1244/82 and (EEC) No 714/89 (2), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 854/97 (3), provides for certain increases of the basic amount of the early-marketing premium for veal; whereas those increases have been altered by Commission Regulation (EC) No 616/97 (4); whereas by application of that Regulation it appears that, unintentionally, the increases were not operative for animals slaughtered between 9 April and 14 April 1997; whereas that situation should be corrected;Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Beef and Veal,HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:Article 1 The following second subparagraph is inserted in Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 616/97:'It shall apply with effect from 14 April 1997`.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, 2 July 1997.For the CommissionFranz FISCHLERMember of the Commission(1) OJ No L 296, 21. 11. 1996, p. 50.(2) OJ No L 391, 31. 12. 1992, p. 20.(3) OJ No L 122, 14. 5. 1997, p. 18.(4) OJ No L 94, 9. 4. 1997, p. 8.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2264/97 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. European cooperation in Mozambique
Date: 1997-07-02
Institutions: AMADEO, European Parliament
Subjects: European Social Fund, European cooperation, Mozambique, Structural Funds, activity report, non-governmental organisation

10. 2. 98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 45/165

(98/C 45/217)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2264/97

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(2 July 1997)

Subject: European cooperation in Mozambique

Will  the  Commission  provide  information  on  cooperation  projects  it  has  managed  via  NGOs  or  under  the
Structural Funds and the ESF and which have been implemented recently, are under way or are to be carried out
in Mozambique?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission

(23 July 1997)

The Commission’s programme in Mozambique is a very large one.

The Commission refers the Honourable Member to the annual report on cooperation with Mozambique which
contains the details sought. The reports are available to Parliament and the most recent are sent direct to the
Honourable Member and to Parliament(cid:146)s Secretariat.

The Honourable Member will appreciate that the structural funds do not apply outside the Community.

(98/C 45/218)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2280/97

by Hedy d(cid:146)Ancona (PSE) to the Commission

(2 July 1997)

Subject: Comenius project

1.

2.

By what percentage has the budget for the Comenius project been cut this year per country?

Is it true that the reduction is ca. 30% for the Netherlands?

Is this reduction a result of the fact that in the past the smaller EU countries have been able to use the
3.
budgets allocated to them, whereas the larger EU countries have had much greater problems? If so, what is the
policy behind imposing reductions on the budgets of countries which have been successful in implementing EU
rules?

4. What  are  the  likely  consequences  of  the  cuts  on  the  programme  in  the  Netherlands,  which  has  been
successful hitherto?

How  do  these  cuts  tie  in  with  the  enthusiastic  response  of  the  Commission  hitherto  to  the  success  of

5.
European exchange policy on education?

Is the Commission or the Council considering action to offset the likely detrimental effects of the cuts and,

6.
if so, what form will that action take?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(22 July 1997)

The budget allocated to the Member States and participating third countries for Comenius action 1 in 1996 and
1997  is  indicated  in  a  table  sent  direct  to  the  Honourable  Member  and  to  the  Parliament(cid:146)s  secretariat.  The
reduction in 1997 is due to a reduction in the total budget attributed to Socrates (198.04 MECU in 1996 compared
to 171.45 MECU in 1997).
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2228/97 by Alexandros ALAVANOS to the Commission. Cofinancing of refugee reception centres in Greece
Date: 1997-07-02
Institutions: ALAVANOS, European Parliament
Subjects: Community budget, EU financing, EU programme, Greece, co-financing, political asylum, refugee, social facilities, town planning

C 76/80

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

11. 3. 98

The  team  in  charge  of  the  project  has  prepared,  in  consultation  with  the  authorities,  an  action  plan  to  be
implemented if the mortality again begins to affect the colony. The causes of this mortality are not yet completely
known. The cause could be a toxin caused by a planktonic algae group, or a virus. Further analyses continue to
determine the real causes of this mortality.

(98/C 76/168)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2224/97

by So¤ren Wibe (PSE) to the Commission

(19 June 1997)

Subject: Regional aid as a reason for the relocation of business activity

Have the SCJ System and Solectron plants in Scotland been developed with the help of regional aid from the
European Union? Swedish newspapers claim that they have, and that Ericsson is now cutting its workforce in
Norrko¤ping and shifting production to those plants.

Have the aforementioned companies in Scotland recently received regional aid from the EU? If so, in what form
and how much? Is it reasonable to assume that such aid was the reason for the relocation of business activities? If
so, is this not a case of unfair competition?

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

(16 July 1997)

The  Commission  would  refer  the  Honourable  Member  to  its  answer  to  Written  Question  P-1679/97  by
Mrs Eriksson (1).

(1)  OJ C 391, 23.12.1997, p. 119.

(98/C 76/169)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2228/97

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(2 July 1997)

Subject: Cofinancing of refugee reception centres in Greece

The Greek Government has adopted a law committing itself to set up reception and temporary-stay centres for
refugees who enter Greece by a variety of means.

Is the setting up of such centres eligible for European Union cofinancing? From which programmes?

Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission

(4 September 1997)

The Honourable Member is certainly aware that the Parliament has created a new budget line in 1997 containing
3.75 MECU in the reserve, which is mainly intended to cover pilot projects on the reception of asylum seekers
and displaced people.

Since this is a new budget line, and there has not previously been any concrete action by the Community in this
field, the Commission intends to proceed by means of pilot projects. Following the Article K.8 agreement and the
release by the Parliament of 2.25 MECU from the reserve, the way is open for Member States, international
organisations and non-governmental organisations to submit pilot projects in the field of the reception of asylum
seekers and displaced people. The Commission has invited Member States to submit concrete projects in these
areas.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2261/97 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Defence industry
Date: 1997-07-02
Institutions: AMADEO, European Parliament
Subjects: European defence policy, arms industry, conventional weapon, disarmament, international agreement, marketing restriction













EUR-Lex - 91997E2261 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E2261

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2261/97 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Defence industry  


Official Journal C 060 , 25/02/1998 P. 0117 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2261/97 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (2 July 1997)Subject: Defence industryThe Commission has submitted a communication entitled 'The challenges facing the European defence-related industry, a contribution for action at European level' (COM(96) 10 final).The Member States are moving towards the definition of an original design for European security, which should take account on the one hand of existing international organizations (WEU, NATO, OSCE, etc.) and, on the other, the needs of those EU Member States which traditionally take a neutral or non-aligned stance in military affairs.Any action by the Commission in the defence industry sector should take account of the specific nature of this industry and its links with security and defence policy, the systems of research and development and production, and the dependence of the sector on purchases by ministries for defence.In this connection, will the Commission impose a ban at European and international level on the production, sale and use of anti-personnel land mines?Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (30 July 1997)The conclusion of an international treaty to ban anti-personnel mines is essentially a matter to be negotiated among sovereign states through the complementary mechanisms of the Ottawa process and the conference on disarmament. In its joint action of October 1996, the Union is 'committed to the goal of the total elimination of anti-personnel landmines and shall work actively towards the achievement, at the earliest possible date of an effective international agreement to ban these weapons world-wide'. At the same time the Union implemented a common moratorium on the export of all anti-personnel landmines to all destinations and continued its extensive practical action to overcome the problems of anti-personnel landmines in all the most afflicted countries. The Commission strongly supports the early conclusion of an international agreement on a total ban, and uses every opportunity in its dealings with third countries, to encourage political and practical action that will assist this process and help overcome the landmine tragedy.