do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3398/97 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Council. Human rights in Algeria
Date: 1997-10-28
Institutions: AMADEO, European Parliament
Subjects: Algeria, European Union, Troika (EU), crime against individuals, human rights, interference, non-governmental organisation, peacekeeping, terrorism

C 174/52

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

8. 6. 98

However,  the  Honourable  Member  should  know  that  the  Commission  is  currently  examining  scientific
justification recently submitted by Finland under the Treaty of Accession. Finland is requesting an amendment of
Community  legislation  to  ban  the  use  of  tylosin  and  spiramycin  as  additives,  in  order  to  preserve  their
effectiveness as substances authorised as veterinary medicinal products.

(1)  OJ L 330, 25.11.1978.
(2)  OJ L 270, 14.12.1970.

(98/C 174/91)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3394/97

by Mark Watts (PSE) to the Commission

(23 October 1997)

Subject: Wind farms

Can the Commission confirm whether there is any truth in the rumour that there will be no new wind farms
created within the EU?

If this is the case, can the Commission comment on why such a decision has been taken?

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission

(5 December 1997)

The Commission is unaware of any decision in the Member States to block the construction of wind farms or the
development of that form of renewable energy.

Indeed, it has information from specialist circles pointing to a generally optimistic assessment of the prospects
for the medium and long-term growth of wind energy within the Community.

The  Commission  is  of  the  opinion  that  renewable  energy  sources,  including  wind  energy,  are  insufficiently
exploited in the Community. The Community provides support for promotion of renewable sources of energy,
for instance in the framework of the Altener and Joule-Thermie programmes, but the Commission is convinced
that renewable energy represents a significantly under-exploited energy potential. It therefore intends to step up
its  efforts  in  this  area,  in  order  to  meet  the  indicative  objective  of  doubling  the  contribution  from  renewable
sources of energy between now and 2010, as outlined in its recent white paper (cid:145)Energy for the future: renewable
sources of energy › a strategy and action plan(cid:146).

(98/C 174/92)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3398/97

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Council

(28 October 1997)

Subject: Human rights in Algeria

The bloodshed is continuing in Algeria. More than 60 people were murdered by armed gangs on the night of
Sunday, 28 and in the early hours of Monday, 29 September 1997 in the Blide region in the west of the country,
50 km from Algiers, and in two districts on the western outskirts of Algiers. The press accounts are terrifying: the
newspaper Liberta‘, for example, reported among other things that a baby(cid:146)s head had been found on the roof of a
house.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3403/97 by Ole KRARUP to the Council. right of residence directives
Date: 1997-10-28
Institutions: European Parliament, KRARUP
Subjects: EC Directive, European treaties, application of EU law, foreign national, free movement of persons, residence permit

C 158/102

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

25. 5. 98

3. What action does the Commission intend to take to remedy this situation by putting competition on an equal
footing and improving conditions for employees in the transport sector?

(1)  OJ L 307, 13.12.1993, p. 18.

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(28 November 1997)

In the white paper on sectors and activities excluded from Council Directive 93/104/EC of 22 February 1993
concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time, the Commission does indeed state (paragraph 14)
that  (cid:145)the  way  in  which  the  exclusions  are  drafted  has  been  interpreted  as  implying  that  all  workers  in  the
transport ... sectors are excluded from the scope of the Directive, even those who perform sedentary tasks(cid:146). The
white paper goes on to say that the Commission considers that this should be clarified, as there is no objective
reason why (cid:145)non-mobile(cid:146) employees should be treated differently from employees carrying out similar tasks in
other industries.

The white paper states (paragraph 17) that (cid:145)while the objective is to protect health and safety, the Commission is
sensitive to the effect of possible distortions of competition and the imperatives of ensuring transport safety, and
this is why an integrated approach to the implementation of the Community(cid:146)s transport and social policies is
favoured in this white paper(cid:146).

In  order  to  remedy  this  situation,  the  Commission  is  proposing,  inter  alia,  to  extend  the  full  provisions  of
Directive 93/104/EC to all non-mobile workers, while making any appropriate adjustments to the derogations.

(98/C 158/133)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3403/97

by Ole Krarup (I-EDN) to the Council

(28 October 1997)

Subject: right of residence directives

With reference to the Amsterdam Treaty(cid:146)s new provisions on increased freedom of movement for persons etc.,
could the Council say to what extent the three directives on the right of residence adopted in 1990 now apply to a
more extensive group of persons?

Answer

(12 February 1998)

The three Directives adopted in 1990 to which the Honourable Member refers clearly determine the categories of
person to which they are applicable.

When the Treaty of Amsterdam comes into force, third-country nationals will be able to benefit, under the future
Articles 62(3) and 63(4), from measures setting out the conditions under which they may travel and reside in the
territory of the Member States.

After entry into force of the Treaty of Amsterdam, it will be up to the Commission or the Member States to use
their right of initiative to propose provisions relating to the right of residence of other categories of person.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3417/97 by Hiltrud BREYER to the Commission. World trade and protection of animals
Date: 1997-10-28
Institutions: BREYER, European Parliament
Subjects: World Trade Organisation, animal welfare, international trade, protection of animals, slaughter of animals, third country, trade restriction, transport of animals

30. 4. 98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 134/159

(98/C 134/215)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3415/97

by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission

(28 October 1997)

Subject: World trade and protection of animals

Article XX provides a series of grounds for trade restrictions, including protection of human and animal life and
health and respect for general public morals.

How  are  these  provisions  to  be  interpreted?  Can  they  be  interpreted  such  that  EU  animal  protection

1.
standards can be maintained or improved without objections?

How  are  the  restrictive  considerations  actually  determined?  To  what  extent  must  restrictions  on  animal
2.
health be accepted and when is a restriction on trade permitted? Who decides what is in line with public morals,
etc.?

To what extent is protection of the well-being of animals or prevention of psychological suffering, such as

3.
fear, taken into account?

Is it possible for an interpretation which satisfies animal protection considerations to be implemented at

4.
international level, or must the WTO provisions be made more definite?

(98/C 134/216)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3417/97

by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission

(28 October 1997)

Subject: World trade and protection of animals

At  present  the  WTO  provisions  do  not  permit  any  differentiation  on  the  basis  of  criteria  which  are  not
demonstrable in the final product. For the protection of animals such non-product related process and production
methods › e.g. breeding and rearing conditions, methods of capture or use of animals in testing vaccines › are
however essential.

To what extent can this provision be brought together with the protection concerns in Article XX? Is it even

1.
possible in animal protection to make a distinction between (cid:145)production(cid:146) and (cid:145)final product(cid:146)?

If non-product related criteria could be taken into account, could the EU animal protection standards be
2.
maintained  or  improved  without  objections  even  if  Article  XX  were  to  be  interpreted  to  the  disadvantage  of
animal protection?

(98/C 134/217)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3418/97

by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission

(31 October 1997)

Subject: World trade and protection of animals

The Commission has stated on many occasions that it would be more promising to promote animal protection
through multilateral agreements with third countries.

In the light of  the experience of negotiating animal  protection  provisions  within  the  Union,  is  this  idea

1.
realistic? What actual type of agreement is envisaged?

2.

If it is realistic, could an improvement of the WTO regulations be pursued at the same time?

3. What measures can be taken by the EU to encourage animal protection in third countries?
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2127/97 of 28 October 1997 establishing unit values for the determination of the customs value of certain perishable goods
Date: 1997-10-28
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: customs regulations, customs valuation, fresh fruit, fresh vegetable, perishable goods













EUR-Lex - 31997R2127 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



31997R2127

Commission Regulation (EC) No 2127/97 of 28 October 1997 establishing unit values for the determination of the customs value of certain perishable goods  


Official Journal L 296 , 30/10/1997 P. 0012 - 0017 





COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2127/97 of 28 October 1997 establishing unit values for the determination of the customs value of certain perishable goodsTHE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 82/97 (2),Having regard to Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code (3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1427/97 (4), and in particular Article 173 (1) thereof,Whereas Articles 173 to 177 of Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 provide that the Commission shall periodically establish unit values for the products referred to in the classification in Annex 26 to that Regulation;Whereas the result of applying the rules and criteria laid down in the abovementioned Articles to the elements communicated to the Commission in accordance with Article 173 (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 is that unit values set out in the Annex to this Regulation should be established in regard to the products in question,HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:Article 1 The unit values provided for in Article 173 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 are hereby established as set out in the table in the Annex hereto.Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on 31 October 1997.This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.Done at Brussels, 28 October 1997.For the CommissionMartin BANGEMANNMember of the Commission(1) OJ L 302, 19. 10. 1992, p. 1.(2) OJ L 17, 21. 1. 1997, p. 1.(3) OJ L 253, 11. 10. 1993, p. 1.(4) OJ L 196, 24. 7. 1997, p. 31.ANNEX >TABLE>
Information from the Commission - Appointment of members of the special aquaculture section of the Advisory Committee on Fisheries
Date: 1997-10-28
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: advisory committee (EU), appointment of staff, aquaculture, fishing industry













EUR-Lex - 31997Y1101(01) - EN






Avis juridique important




|



31997Y1101(01)

Information from the Commission - Appointment of members of the special aquaculture section of the Advisory Committee on Fisheries  


Official Journal C 330 , 01/11/1997 P. 0015 - 0016 





Appointment of members of the special aquaculture section of the Advisory Committee on Fisheries (97/C 330/04)A special aquaculture section of the Advisory Committee in the fisheries sector was set up by Commission Decision 97/247/EC of 4 April 1997 (1).By Decision of 28 October 1997, the Commission appointed the 20 members of the said section whose term of office expires at the end of the term of office of the members of the Advisory Committee on Fisheries.>TABLE>(1) OJ L 97, 12. 4. 1997, p. 28.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3409/97 by Roberta ANGELILLI to the Commission. Construction of the Castel Sant'Angelo underpass in Rome
Date: 1997-10-28
Institutions: ANGELILLI, European Parliament
Subjects: Latium, competence of the Member States, engineering structure, environmental impact, feasibility study, impact study













EUR-Lex - 91997E3409 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E3409

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3409/97 by Roberta ANGELILLI to the Commission. Construction of the Castel Sant'Angelo underpass in Rome  


Official Journal C 174 , 08/06/1998 P. 0054 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-3409/97 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission (28 October 1997)Subject: Construction of the Castel Sant'Angelo underpass in RomeThe 'Castel Sant'Angelo Underpass' project has now undergone substantial modifications. The original project has been radically changed (it was recognized as being impossible to carry out, whilst work was under way), the estimated cost has risen from 100 to 169 billion lire, and the completion dates have obviously been put back. Whilst the Commission was still awaiting answers from the Italian authorities to its requests concerning the environmental impact assessment of the old project, a similar problem arose in connection with the new project.In view of this, can the Commission say:1. whether the new project complies with Directive 85/337/EEC ((OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40.)) on environmental impact assessment, in particular as regards the involvement of the general public in the procedures and respecting and safeguarding the architectural heritage and historic monuments;2. whether, in view of the increased estimated cost (of this and other projects covered by the Rome 2000 Framework Agreement), the EIB will increase its funding proportionately;3. whether the delayed completion will jeopardize EIB financing for the project;4. under what circumstances the EIB might withdraw its funding?Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission (8 December 1997)The project in question is not one of the investment projects selected by the European Investment Bank (EIB) under its Rome 2000 financing programme. Accordingly, the EIB has not undertaken a preliminary study.The Commission does not possess any additional information about the project as Member States are not obliged to communicate to it any information regarding environmental impact assessments for every project they plan to carry out.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3412/97 by Roberta ANGELILLI to the Commission. Application in Italy of European legislation on waste disposal
Date: 1997-10-28
Institutions: ANGELILLI, European Parliament
Subjects: EC Directive, Italy, application of EU law, dangerous substance, environmental protection, infringement procedure (EU), packaging, waste disposal, waste management, waste recycling

C 158/106

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

25. 5. 98

(98/C 158/138)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3412/97

by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission

(28 October 1997)

Subject: Application in Italy of European legislation on waste disposal

In  its  answer  to  Written  Question  E-2350/97 (1)  the  European  Commission  said  that  some  aspects  of  Italian
legislation conflict with Directive 91/156/EEC (2)on waste disposal and that there are specific cases which are
currently the subject of infringement proceedings.

Can the Commission:

1.  specify which aspects of Italian legislation are incompatible with Directive 91/156/EEC;

2.  say which specific cases are at present the subject of infringement proceedings?

(1)  OJ C 117, 16.4.1998, p. 12.
(2)  OJ L 78, 26.3.1991, p. 32.

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(5 December 1997)

Infringement  proceedings  against  the  Italian  authorities  are  currently  under  way  with  regard  to  the
non-conformity of Italian legislation with Council Directive 91/156/EEC (1) amending Directive 75/442/EEC (2)
on waste. The content of the infringement proceedings is confidential. The main breach concerns the exclusion of
some categories of waste from the scope of national legislation.

The specific cases that are the subject of infringement proceedings regarding the disposal of waste concern the
abandoning  of  non-authorised  waste  in  a  protected  area  (Vallone  di  S.  Rocco),  the  conformity  of  Italian
legislation with Council Directive 94/67/EC on the incineration of hazardous waste (3), and the conformity of
Italian  legislation  with  Council  Directive  91/689/EEC  on  hazardous  waste (4)  and  with  Council  Directive
94/62/EC on (5) OJ L 194, 25.7.1975.

(1)  OJ L 78, 26.3.1991.
(2)  OJ L 78, 26.3.1991.
(3)  OJ L 365, 31.12.1994.
(4)  OJ L 377, 31.12.1991.
(5)  OJ L 365, 31.12.1994.

(98/C 158/139)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3420/97

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(31 October 1997)

Subject: Measures on behalf of Romanies and Pomaks

The  operational  programme  (cid:145)Combating  exclusion  from  the  labour  market(cid:146)  and,  in  particular,  Measure  4  of
Sub-programme 3 › (cid:145)Integration and reintegration of other social groups excluded from the labour market(cid:146) ›
target Romanies and Pomaks in an attempt to combat illiteracy, offer them vocational development and other
measures.

Given that there is a timetable for implementing Sub-programme 3, will the Commission say:

1.  what stage the sub-programme has reached and what measures have been put into effect, and

2.  whether take-up is behind schedule and, if so, what the main reasons are for the delays?
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2113/97 of 28 October 1997 repealing Regulation (EC) No 414/97 adopting exceptional support measures for the market in pigmeat in Germany
Date: 1997-10-28
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Germany, aid system, animal plague, production aid, slaughter of animals, swine













EUR-Lex - 31997R2113 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



31997R2113

Commission Regulation (EC) No 2113/97 of 28 October 1997 repealing Regulation (EC) No 414/97 adopting exceptional support measures for the market in pigmeat in Germany  


Official Journal L 295 , 29/10/1997 P. 0001 - 0001 





COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2113/97 of 28 October 1997 repealing Regulation (EC) No 414/97 adopting exceptional support measures for the market in pigmeat in Germany THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2759/75 of 29 October 1975 on the common organization of the market in pigmeat (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3290/94 (2), and in particular Article 20 thereof,Whereas, because of the outbreak of classical swine fever in certain production regions in Germany animal health measures were adopted by the German authorities pursuant to Article 9 of Council Directive 80/217/EEC of 22 January 1980 introducing Community measures for the control of classical swine fever (3), as last amended by Decision 93/384/EEC (4); whereas exceptional support measures for the market in pigmeat were adopted for this Member State by Commission Regulation (EC) No 414/97 (5), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1500/97 (6);Whereas, in view of the progress achieved on the animal health side, the exceptional market support measures can now be closed down; whereas, therefore, Regulation (EC) No 414/97 needs to be repealed;Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Pigmeat,HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:Article 1 Regulation (EC) No 414/97 is hereby repealed.Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of 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, 28 October 1997.For the CommissionFranz FISCHLERMember of the Commission(1) OJ L 282, 1. 11. 1975, p. 1.(2) OJ L 349, 31. 12. 1994, p. 105.(3) OJ L 47, 21. 2. 1980, p. 11.(4) OJ L 166, 8. 7. 1993, p. 34.(5) OJ L 62, 4. 3. 1997, p. 29.(6) OJ L 202, 30. 7. 1997, p. 44.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3404/97 by Ole KRARUP to the Commission. right of residence directives
Date: 1997-10-28
Institutions: European Parliament, KRARUP
Subjects: EU national, application of EU law, free movement of persons, occupational status, report, residence permit, retired person, self-employment, student, wage earner













EUR-Lex - 91997E3404 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E3404

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3404/97 by Ole KRARUP to the Commission. right of residence directives  


Official Journal C 174 , 08/06/1998 P. 0053 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-3404/97 by Ole Krarup (I-EDN) to the Commission (28 October 1997)Subject: Right of residence directivesWith reference to the Amsterdam Treaty's new provisions on increased freedom of movement for persons etc., could the Commission say to what extent the three directives on the right of residence adopted in 1990 now apply to a more extensive group of persons?Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (29 January 1998)The Directives to which the Honourable Member refers are Directives 90/365/EEC on the right of residence for employees and self-employed persons who have ceased their occupational activity ((OJ L 180, 13.7.1990. )), 90/364/EEC on the right of residence and 96/93/EEC on the right of residence for students ((OJ L 317, 18.12.1993. )).Among other things, these Directives extended the scope of the right of residence, which had initially been restricted to persons exercising an economic activity. In this connection, Directive 90/364/EEC states in Article 1 that it does not apply to 'nationals of Member States who do not enjoy this right under other provisions of Community law'.This extension of the right of residence has been sanctioned by the Treaty on European Union. By virtue of Article 8a, inserted into the EC Treaty, freedom of movement is now a fundamental right conferred on every citizen of the Union, and there is Longer any reference to the exercise of economic activity ((Second Commission report on Union citizenship (COM(97) 230 final). )). Article 8a does though stipulate that this right is to be exercised subject to the limitations and conditions laid down in the EC Treaty and secondary legislation.The Amsterdam Treaty, which has incorporated Article 8a, does not alter the legal situation as regards the right of residence.The Commission would add that, in the report which it is drawing up on the application of the above three Directives, it will pay special attention to the difficulties that individuals might encounter in securing recognition of their right of residence under one of those Directives.