do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
97/659/EC: Commission Decision of 1 October 1997 on financial contributions from the Community for the eradication of Newcastle disease in Germany (Only the German text is authentic)
Date: 1997-10-01
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU financing, Germany, animal disease, poultry













EUR-Lex - 31997D0659 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



31997D0659

97/659/EC: Commission Decision of 1 October 1997 on financial contributions from the Community for the eradication of Newcastle disease in Germany (Only the German text is authentic)  


Official Journal L 278 , 11/10/1997 P. 0028 - 0028 





COMMISSION DECISION of 1 October 1997 on financial contributions from the Community for the eradication of Newcastle disease in Germany (Only the German text is authentic) (97/659/EC)THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,Having regard to Council Decision 90/424/EEC of 26 June 1990 on expenditure in the veterinary field (1), as amended by Decision 94/370/EC (2) and in particular Articles 3 (3) and 4 (2) thereof,Whereas 28 outbreaks of Newcastle disease occurred in Germany in 1995; whereas the appearance of this disease is a serious danger to the Community's poultry and, in order to help eradicate the disease as rapidly as possible, the Community can compensate for the losses suffered;Whereas, as soon as the presence of Newcastle disease was officially confirmed the national authorities took appropriate measures which included the measures as listed in Article 3 (2) of Decision 90/424/EEC; whereas such measures were notified by Germany;Whereas the conditions for Community financial assistance have been met;Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Veterinary Committee,HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:Article 1 Germany may obtain Community financial assistance for outbreaks of Newcastle disease which occurred during 1995. The financial contribution by the Community shall be:- 50 % of the costs incurred by Germany in compensating the owner for the slaughter, destruction of poultry and poultry products as appropriate,- 50 % of the costs incurred by Germany for the cleaning and disinfection of holdings and equipment,- 50 % of the costs incurred by Germany in compensating the owner for the destruction of contaminated feedingstuffs and contaminated equipment.Article 2 1. The Community financial contribution shall be granted after supporting documents have been submitted.2. The documents referred to in paragraph 1 shall be submitted by Germany no later than three months from the notification of this Decision.Article 3 This Decision is addressed to the Federal Republic of Germany.Done at Brussels, 1 October 1997.For the CommissionFranz FISCHLERMember of the Commission(1) OJ L 224, 18. 8. 1990, p. 19.(2) OJ L 168, 2. 7. 1994, p. 31.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3023/97 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Future Noise Policy (Green Paper)
Date: 1997-10-01
Institutions: AMADEO, European Parliament
Subjects: EU publication, European Commission, noise pollution, pollution control measures, prevention of pollution, proposal (EU), resolution of parliament

C 117/130

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

16. 4. 98

(98/C 117/170)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3023/97

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(1 October 1997)

Subject: Future Noise Policy (Green Paper)

The Commission(cid:146)s proposal to draw up a framework directive on measuring and assessing exposure to noise, set
out in its green paper on future noise policy (COM(96) 540 final), is welcome; however, its announcement that it
will establish the target values and measures to enforce them (cid:145)for a later stage(cid:146) is disappointing.

On the basis of the principle of prevention, these target values are needed for the priority area of noise abatement
and the Commission is therefore asked not to delay in defining them.

(98/C 117/171)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3024/97

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(1 October 1997)

Subject: Future Noise Policy (Green Paper)

Given the scale of the problem of noise pollution in the Community and the fact that noise abatement has not so
far  been  given  a  high  priority  under  European  environmental  policy,  the  plans  to  draw  up  a  wide-ranging
programme to tackle the problem, set out in the Commission(cid:146)s green paper on future noise policy (COM(96) 540
final), are very important.

The contents of the green paper are welcome in principle and the Commission is asked to lose no time in drawing
up the action programme.

(98/C 117/172)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3025/97

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(1 October 1997)

Subject: Future Noise Policy (Green Paper)

With reference to the Commission(cid:146)s green paper on future noise policy (COM(96) 540 final),will it make noise
abatement one of the priority areas of Community research and development and will it take steps to improve the
coordination and increase the concentration of its R&D?

(98/C 117/173)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3026/97

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(1 October 1997)

Subject: Future Noise Policy (Green Paper)

The  Economic  and  Social  Committee  accepts  the  Commission(cid:146)s  proposal  to  use  economic  instruments,  put
forward in its green paper on future noise policy (COM(96) 540 final), but opposes the introduction of fiscal
measures to (cid:145)punish(cid:146) those responsible for noise pollution or provide a source of revenue for the government.

Will the Commission ensure that the use of economic instruments is not a substitute for setting limit values for
noise emissions?
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3005/97 by Roberta ANGELILLI to the Commission. European legislation on reducing air pollution and safeguarding the quality of life in cities
Date: 1997-10-01
Institutions: ANGELILLI, European Parliament
Subjects: air quality, motor fuel, motor vehicle pollution, pollution control, public health, quality of life, quality of the environment, technical standard, urban area

C 134/54

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

30. 4. 98

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(18 November 1997)

The  Commission  has  not  received  any  complaints  concerning  the  purchase  of  buses  by  CO.TRA.L.  The
Honourable Member is asked to send the Commission the evidence she has indicating a possible infringement of
Community public procurement legislation.

A difference between the market price and the price paid in the case in question does not in itself constitute an
infringement of that legislation.

Under the circumstances, the Commission does not consider that it can comment on the case.

(98/C 134/66)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3005/97

by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission

(1 October 1997)

Subject: European legislation on reducing air pollution and safeguarding the quality of life in cities

In its answer to Written Question E-1673/97 (1) the Commission said that on the basis of Directive 96/62/EC (2) it
would draw up new proposals on air quality and the quality of life in the urban environment.

It also referred to a new strategy adopted by the Commission on 18 June 1996 in order to reduce pollution caused
by vehicles.

In view of this, can the Commission say:

1.  what the practical arrangements and timetable are for the formulation of the Commission(cid:146)s proposals on the

basis of Directive 96/62/EC;

2.  what  in  essence  are  the  main  features  of  the  new  strategy  it  adopted  in  June  1996  and  what  official

documents can be referred to in this connection?

(1)  OJ C 45, 10.2.1998, p. 78.
(2)  OJ L 296, 21.11.1996, p. 55

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(7 November 1997)

A proposal for a Council Directive relating to the establishment of limit values for sulphur dioxide, nitrogen

1.
dioxide, particulate matter and lead was adopted on 8 October 1997 (1).

2.
The strategy which the Commission adopted on 18 June 1996 for controlling atmospheric emissions from
road transport (2) can be traced back to the results of the Auto/Oil programme. The aim is to improve air quality
in the Community in the run-up to 2010 by reducing pollutant emissions by between 60 and 70% compared with
1996, using an integrated, balanced and cost-effective approach. In this context, and as part of the strategy, two
legislative  proposals  have  been  adopted  to  improve  petrol  and  diesel  fuels (3)  and  set  stricter  standards  for
passenger cars† (and for light commercial vehicles) by the year 2000.

Parliament  held  its  first  reading  on  the  two  proposals  on  10  April  1997  and  the  Council  reached  a  common
position on them on 7 October 1997.

(1)  COM(97) 500.
(2)  COM(96) 248.
(3)  COM(97) 271.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3029/97 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Human Rights
Date: 1997-10-01
Institutions: AMADEO, European Parliament
Subjects: European Convention on Human Rights, Treaty on European Union, anti-discriminatory measure, charter on human rights, democracy, fundamental rights, human rights

30. 4. 98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 134/61

(98/C 134/75)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3029/97

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(1 October 1997)

Subject: Human Rights

The Commission(cid:146)s policy, set out in (cid:145)The European Union and the External Dimension of Human Rights Policy(cid:146)
(CES 0474/97) (1), lacks clear, strategic guidelines for the implementation of a coherent human rights policy. The
Economic  and  Social  Committee  has  the  impression  that  EU  policy  to  date  has  been  determined  on  a
case-by-case basis.

Will the Commission follow three lines of action to consolidate the external aspects of the EU(cid:146)s human rights
policy:

1.  accession  by  the  EU  to  the  European  Convention  for  the  protection  of  human  rights  and  fundamental

freedoms;

2. 

the creation of a European (cid:145)Bill of Rights(cid:146);

3. 

the inclusion of certain specific human rights clauses in the Protocol attached to the Maastricht Treaty?

(1)  OJ C 206, 7.7.1997, p. 117.

(98/C 134/76)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3030/97

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(1 October 1997)

Subject: Human Rights

With reference to (cid:145)The European Union and the External Dimension of Human Rights Policy(cid:146) (CES-0474/97) (1),
will  the  Commission  insert  several  specific  human  rights  clauses  in  the  Protocol  attached  to  the  Maastricht
Treaty?

(1)  OJ C 206, 7.7.1997, p. 117.

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-3029/97 and E-3030/97
given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission

(17 October 1997)

The Commission draws the Honourable Member’s attention to the fact that it has for some considerable time
adopted a coherent approach on human rights, in particular as regards the aspects they raised.

In 1991 it put a communication before the Council to obtain a negotiating mandate defining the arrangements for
the Community’s accession to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental
Freedoms. This initiative, actively supported by Parliament, prompted the Council to ask the Court of Justice in
April 1994 to rule on whether accession was compatible with the Treaty establishing the Community.

On 28 March 1996 the Court ruled that, as Community law stood, the Community did not have the competence to
accede to the Convention. In its grounds it said that given the act’s constitutional scope and its implications for
the Community institutions it went beyond the limits of Article 235 and could not be implemented by amending
the Treaty.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3025/97 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Future Noise Policy (Green Paper)
Date: 1997-10-01
Institutions: AMADEO, European Parliament
Subjects: EU publication, European Commission, exchange of information, noise pollution, pollution control measures, prevention of pollution, proposal (EU), research and development, resolution of parliament













EUR-Lex - 91997E3025 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E3025

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3025/97 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Future Noise Policy (Green Paper)  


Official Journal C 117 , 16/04/1998 P. 0130 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-3025/97 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (1 October 1997)Subject: Future Noise Policy (Green Paper)With reference to the Commission's green paper on future noise policy (COM(96) 540 final),will it make noise abatement one of the priority areas of Community research and development and will it take steps to improve the coordination and increase the concentration of its R& D?Joint answer to Written Questions E-3023/97, E-3024/97, E-3025/97, E-3026/97, E-3027/97 and E-3028/97 given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (5 November 1997)The Commission has become highly aware of the various topics mentioned by the Honourable Member.On the basis of several opinions delivered after publication of the Green Paper on noise and in particular on the Resolution adopted by Parliament, the Commission is currently putting the final touches to the future activities concerned in the fight against noise. It is intended that these activities will form part of a consistent, realistic programme. One of the key aspects of this programme will of course be coordination and consultation of the various operators involved in the problems arising from noise. The Commission does not plan to give preference to any particular measure. Balanced utilisation of the various instruments available is planned. The Commission does not intend to replace the setting of emission standards by economic incentives. In addition the Commission will also take care to avoid any options which would cause a shift in traffic towards transport modes which might have a greater impact on the environment.Finally, the setting of targets is an essential prerequisite for action against noise. The Commission is currently analysing the various possible options as regards the definition and setting of those targets.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3033/97 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Italian projects for the Urban programme
Date: 1997-10-01
Institutions: AMADEO, European Parliament
Subjects: EU financing, EU programme, Italy, distribution of aid, municipality, regional and local authorities, reserves, town, urban area

16. 4. 98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 117/127

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-3013/97 and E-3033/97
given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(24 October 1997)

On  8  May  1996  the  Commission  announced  its  decision  on  how  the  financial  reserve  for  the  Community
Initiatives was to be allocated.

The reference allocation for the Urban Initiative in Italy for 1997-99 is ECU 11.81 million for Objective 1 areas
and ECU 6.40 million for other areas (1995 indexed prices).

In point 20 of its communication to the Member States (1) the Commission invited them to present operational
programmes for financing under Urban. No allocations were made to specific areas of any Member State other
than to split the amount allocated to each between Objective 1 and other areas.

The Italian authorities have sent a proposal for programmes in the cities of Trieste, Lecce and Catanzaro.

(1)  OJ C 200, 10.7.1996

(98/C 117/164)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3014/97

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(1 October 1997)

Subject: ERDF projects

On 30 November 1995 the Commission published itsthe invitation to tender urban pilot projects under ERDF
Article 10 on innovatory measures.

Will the Commission state how many projects were submitted by Italy?

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

(23 October 1997)

Following the call for proposals (1) under Article 10 of the European Regional Development Fund Regulation (2)
the  Commission  received  503  projects  of  which  119  were  from  Italy.  The  final  choice  was  the  result  of
application of a rigorous selection procedure to the large number of proposals submitted. Using the criteria set
the Commission selected a total of 26 projects, 4 of which are in Italy, in Brindisi, Milan, Naples and Turin.

(1)  OJ C 319, 30.11.1995.
(2)  OJ L 193, 31.7.1993.

(98/C 117/165)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3016/97

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(1 October 1997)

Subject: Illustrative nuclear programme for the European Union

With  reference  to  the  Commission(cid:146)s  Communication  on  the  nuclear  industries  in  the  European  Union  (an
illustrative nuclear programm according to Article 40 of the Euratom Treaty) (COM(96) 339 final › CES 470/97)
and  given  the  potential  hazards  associated  with  nuclear  power  stations  in  the  CEECs  and  the  CIS,  should
concerns not be voiced regarding the extremely damaging impact which another large-scale nuclear accident
would have on public opinion? The PHARE and TACIS programmes have proved valuable but are now the target
of mounting criticism. Given that these programmes deal with nuclear safety, will the Commission review them
urgently and then publish their findings?
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3038/97 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Age discrimination
Date: 1997-10-01
Institutions: AMADEO, European Parliament
Subjects: anti-discriminatory measure, competition (EU), elderly person, job access, older worker, recruitment













EUR-Lex - 91997E3038 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E3038

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3038/97 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Age discrimination  


Official Journal C 117 , 16/04/1998 P. 0133 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-3038/97 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (1 October 1997)Subject: Age discriminationThe IGC should have acted to eliminate discrimination on grounds of age by inserting an article (6a) in the new Treaty. Documents in my possession indicate that this was not the case. Nonetheless, this is a genuine problem and we are faced with cases of discrimination in our daily lives. What is more, this problem is occurring as the average age of Europe's citizens continues to rise almost exponentially.Will the Commission tackle the problem, particularly as regards harmonizing the rules on notices of competition and their enforcement?Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (24 November 1997)The Commission would like to inform the Honourable Member that the Amsterdam Treaty has introduced a new legal basis for the adoption of Community measures to combat, inter alia, discrimination based on age (new Article 6a of the EC Treaty).The Commission will consider any measures which might be appropriate in this field once the Amsterdam Treaty has been ratified.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3021/97 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Improving the production and marketing of honey
Date: 1997-10-01
Institutions: AMADEO, European Parliament
Subjects: EU aid, EU control, animal disease, apiculture, honey, import, marketing, production improvement, technical cooperation, third country













EUR-Lex - 91997E3021 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E3021

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3021/97 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Improving the production and marketing of honey  


Official Journal C 117 , 16/04/1998 P. 0128 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-3021/97 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (1 October 1997)Subject: Improving the production and marketing of honeyThe Proposal for a Council Regulation (EC) laying down general rules for the application of measures to improve the production and marketing of honey (COM(96) 596 final - 96/0282 CNS) ((OJ C 378, 13.12.1996, p. 20. )) follows up a consultation paper on European apiculture issued in 1994. Its main aim is to use ECU 15 million a year in Community funds to promote national programmes for technical assistance, laboratory analyses and other measures to fight diseases which afflict bees, along with studies, conducted at national level, on the production and marketing structures in the sector.Will the Commission insert in its proposal measures regarding the circulation of honey on the internal market, including curbs on the vast imports of honey from third countries and quality standards for honey produced in the European Union?Joint answer to Written Questions E-3019/97, E-3020/97, E-3021/97 and E-3022/97 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (29 October 1997)The Commission would point out to the Honourable Member that Council Regulation (EC) No 1221/97 laying down general rules for the application of measures to improve the production and marketing of honey ((OJ L 173, 1.7.1997. )) was adopted on 25 June.One of the specific priorities of the Regulation is technical assistance to beekeepers. This includes training of young farmers interested in apiculture. The Regulation's aim is improvement of the production and marketing of honey, i.e. it is not a disease eradication programme. It provides for Community part-financing of national programmes and is intended to cover all beekeepers without distinction.On imports and on quality standards for honey marketed within the Community, Council Directive 74/409/EEC on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to honey ((OJ L 221, 12.8.1974. )) applies. A proposal for amendment of it is at present before Parliament and the Council.Under Council Directive 89/397/EEC on the official control of foodstuffs ((OJ L 186, 30.6.1989. )) honey from third countries is subject to the same control rules as that produced in the Community. It is up to the national authorities to take all necessary action to effect control in conformity with that Directive.