do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 4176/97 by Daniel VARELA SUANZES- CARPEGNA to the Commission. Cohesion policy and culture
Date: 1998-01-21
Institutions: European Parliament, VARELA SUANZES-CARPEGNA
Subjects: EU programme, Structural Funds, cultural policy, culture, development plan, economic and social cohesion, job creation, public economy, regional development

C 196/94

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

22. 6. 98

(98/C 196/131)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4176/97

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE) to the Commission

(21 January 1998)

Subject: Cohesion policy and culture

Can  the  Commission  say  what  cultural  projects  were  cofinanced  in  the  context  of  the  Community  Initiative
programmes during the programming periods 1989-1993 and 1994-1999, specifying the countries involved, the
regional objective under which each project came, the total cost of execution and the amount cofinanced by the
Community?

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

(6 March 1998)

In  view  of  the  length  of  its  answer,  the  Commission  is  sending  it  direct  to  the  Honourable  Member  and  to
Parliament(cid:146)s Secretariat.

(98/C 196/132)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4177/97

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE) to the Commission

(21 January 1998)

Subject: Cohesion policy and culture

In its communication COM(96) 512 final, Cohesion Policy and Culture: A contribution to employment (page 4),
the Commission states that cultural activities are only eligible for funding under the Structural Funds if they
contribute to sustainable employment and form an integral part of local or regional development strategies.

Can  the  Commission  supply  data  concerning  the  contribution  made  to  employment  and  regional  or  local
development by the cultural projects cofinanced by the Structural Funds in the programming period 1989-1993
and the current programming period 1994-1999?

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

(17 February 1998)

The Commission emphasised in the communication that there is still a lack of precise knowledge of the link
between culture and regional or local employment creation. This is mainly due to the fact that the cultural sector
is not homogeneous and is contained within different programme priorities or statistical categories. Moreover,
there are significant variations of definition and statistical classification of culture between the Member States.
The communication therefore instead gives examples of successful initiatives and their estimated employment
effects.

(98/C 196/133)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4185/97

by Ba·rbara Du¤hrkop Du¤ hrkop (PSE) to the Council

(22 January 1998)

Subject: Ban on use of driftnets and the UK Presidency

Further to the decisions taken by the most recent Council of Ministers for Fisheries, what measures will the UK
Presidency propose to the Council to end the use of driftnets?
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 141/98 of 21 January 1998 fixing the maximum export refund for white sugar for the 23rd partial invitation to tender issued within the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1408/97
Date: 1998-01-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: award of contract, export refund, white sugar

22. 1. 98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 17/7

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 141/98

of 21 January 1998

fixing the maximum export refund for white sugar for the 23rd partial invitation
to tender issued within the framework of the standing invitation to tender
provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1408/97

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1785/81
of 30 June 1981 on the common organization of the
markets in the sugar sector (1), as last amended by Regula-
tion (EC) No 1599/96 (2), and in particular the second
subparagraph of Article 17 (5)

(b) thereof,

Whereas Commission Regulation (EC) No 1408/97 of 22
July 1997 on a standing invitation to tender to determine
levies and/or
refunds on exports of white sugar (3),
requires partial invitations to tender to be issued for the
export of this sugar;

Whereas, pursuant to Article 9 (1) of Regulation (EC) No
1408/97 a maximum export refund shall be fixed, as the
case may be, account being taken in particular of the
state and foreseeable development of the Community and
world markets in sugar, for the partial invitation to tender
in question;

following an examination of

the tenders
Whereas,
submitted in response to the 23rd partial invitation to
tender, the provisions set out in Article 1 should be
adopted;

Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are
in accordance with the opinion of
the Management
Committee for Sugar,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For the 23rd partial invitation to tender for white sugar
to Regulation (EC) No 1408/97 the
issued pursuant
maximum amount of the export refund is fixed at ECU
42,520 per 100 kilograms.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 22 January
1998.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member
States.

Done at Brussels, 21 January 1998.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 177, 1. 7. 1981, p. 4.
(2) OJ L 206, 16. 8. 1996, p. 43.
(3) OJ L 194, 23. 7. 1997, p. 16.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 4209/97 by Bryan CASSIDY to the Commission. Judgment of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on 26 October 1996 in the case of Elida Gibbs Limited (Case C-317/94)
Date: 1998-01-21
Institutions: CASSIDY, European Parliament
Subjects: EU law - national law, France, Germany, Greece, VAT, interpretation of the law, judgment of the Court (EU), preliminary issue

C 223/72

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

17. 7. 98

Although the Commission promised to contact the relevant authorities in the Member States about the matter,
can it say why these moves have not produced more positive results with a view to it becoming general practice
for the airlines of the EU Member States to be identified with the European emblem all over the world?

(1)  OJ C 136, 27.5.1991, p. 11.

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(2 April 1998)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to his Written Question E-583/95 (1).

That answer is still valid.

(1)  OJ C 196, 31.7.1995.

(98/C 223/87)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4208/97

by Bryan Cassidy (PPE) to the Commission

(21 January 1998)

Subject: Judgment of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on 26 October 1996 in the case of Elida Gibbs Limited

(Case C-317/94)

This  ECJ  judgment  appears  to  be  frustrated  by  its  non-application  in  Germany  and  its  partial  application  in
France and Greece.

What action was taken originally by the Commission to determine whether all Member States were complying
fully with the ECJ judgment in Elida Gibbs Limited?

(98/C 223/88)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4209/97

by Bryan Cassidy (PPE) to the Commission

(21 January 1998)

Subject: Judgment of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on 26 October 1996 in the case of Elida Gibbs Limited

(Case C-317/94)

This  ECJ  judgment  appears  to  be  frustrated  by  its  non-application  in  Germany  and  its  partial  application  in
France and Greece.

What action has now been taken against Germany, France and Greece, which are not yet complying with the
judgment? Are any other Member States not currently complying and what action has the Commission taken in
respect of these?

(98/C 223/89)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4210/97

by Bryan Cassidy (PPE) to the Commission

(21 January 1998)

Subject: Judgment of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on 26 October 1996 in the case of Elida Gibbs Limited

(Case C-317/94)

This  ECJ  judgment  appears  to  be  frustrated  by  its  non-application  in  Germany  and  its  partial  application  in
France and Greece.

In particular, in the case of preliminary rulings relating to the interpretation of the Community law on VAT, is it
the case that the European Commission must, within two months of a decision being released, write to each of the
Member States asking how they apply the measure in question?
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 4208/97 by Bryan CASSIDY to the Commission. Judgment of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on 26 October 1996 in the case of Elida Gibbs Limited (Case C-317/94)
Date: 1998-01-21
Institutions: CASSIDY, European Parliament
Subjects: EU law - national law, France, Germany, Greece, VAT, interpretation of the law, judgment of the Court (EU), preliminary issue

C 223/72

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

17. 7. 98

Although the Commission promised to contact the relevant authorities in the Member States about the matter,
can it say why these moves have not produced more positive results with a view to it becoming general practice
for the airlines of the EU Member States to be identified with the European emblem all over the world?

(1)  OJ C 136, 27.5.1991, p. 11.

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(2 April 1998)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to his Written Question E-583/95 (1).

That answer is still valid.

(1)  OJ C 196, 31.7.1995.

(98/C 223/87)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4208/97

by Bryan Cassidy (PPE) to the Commission

(21 January 1998)

Subject: Judgment of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on 26 October 1996 in the case of Elida Gibbs Limited

(Case C-317/94)

This  ECJ  judgment  appears  to  be  frustrated  by  its  non-application  in  Germany  and  its  partial  application  in
France and Greece.

What action was taken originally by the Commission to determine whether all Member States were complying
fully with the ECJ judgment in Elida Gibbs Limited?

(98/C 223/88)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4209/97

by Bryan Cassidy (PPE) to the Commission

(21 January 1998)

Subject: Judgment of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on 26 October 1996 in the case of Elida Gibbs Limited

(Case C-317/94)

This  ECJ  judgment  appears  to  be  frustrated  by  its  non-application  in  Germany  and  its  partial  application  in
France and Greece.

What action has now been taken against Germany, France and Greece, which are not yet complying with the
judgment? Are any other Member States not currently complying and what action has the Commission taken in
respect of these?

(98/C 223/89)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4210/97

by Bryan Cassidy (PPE) to the Commission

(21 January 1998)

Subject: Judgment of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on 26 October 1996 in the case of Elida Gibbs Limited

(Case C-317/94)

This  ECJ  judgment  appears  to  be  frustrated  by  its  non-application  in  Germany  and  its  partial  application  in
France and Greece.

In particular, in the case of preliminary rulings relating to the interpretation of the Community law on VAT, is it
the case that the European Commission must, within two months of a decision being released, write to each of the
Member States asking how they apply the measure in question?
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 4166/97 by Irene SOLTWEDEL-SCHÄFER to the Commission. British beef
Date: 1998-01-21
Institutions: European Parliament, SOLTWEDEL-SCHAEFER
Subjects: EU law - national law, United Kingdom, animal disease, beef, export restriction, infringement procedure (EU), national implementing measure, veterinary inspection

C 196/90

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

22. 6. 98

Conversely, the milk yield of Finnish cows is higher than the Community average, implying a greater reliance on
concentrate feed. As a consequence, Finnish farmers could be expected to benefit to a greater extent from a feed
price fall.

A high reliance on grassland but on the other hand comparatively intensive production systems shows the issue is
not straightforward. Since publication of the CAP 2000 policy orientations, the Commission has visited each
Member  State  and  listened  to  the  points  of  view  of  governments,  industry  and  other  non  government
organisations. The Commission is also working to understand these issues better and is sure this process will
continue after the formal proposals are published.

These formal proposals will shortly be proposed by the Commission and are not yet finalised. However, they will
reflect the Commission(cid:146)s desire that livestock farming support should be more flexible, allowing Member States
better to take into account the type of problems raised by the Honourable Member.

(1)  COM(97) 2000 final.
(2)  OJ L 215, 30.7.1992.

(98/C 196/125)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4166/97

by Irene Soltwedel-Scha¤fer (V) to the Commission

(21 January 1998)

Subject: British beef

When  was  the  EU  ban  on  the  export  of  British  beef  transposed  into  national  (British)  law  in  the  form  of
implementing provisions?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(9 February 1998)

Commission  Decision  96/239/EC  of  27  March  1996 (1)  as  amended  by  Commission  Decision  96/362/EC  of
11 June 1996 on emergency measures to protect against bovine spongiform encephalopathy (2) imposed export
prohibitions on United Kingdom bovine animals and bovine meat and products derived from bovine animals
slaughtered in the United Kingdom. These Decisions were initially applied by the United Kingdom authorities by
a mixture of legislation, regulation and administrative measures.

Following inspections by veterinary inspectors it appeared that in some respects the national measures applying
the ban were incomplete.

The Commission consequently put pressure on the United Kingdom government resulting in the adoption by the
latter during August 1997 of more comprehensive national rules followed up during the following month by
detailed circulars governing in particular the implementation of the new legislation at ports.

Commission inspections have also discovered certain inadequacies in the levels of official controls at United
Kingdom  meat  plants  and  cold  stores  which  could  have  implications  for  enforcement  of  the  export  ban.  An
infringement procedure has been opened against the United Kingdom in respect of this aspect.

(1)  OJ L 78, 28.3.1996.
(2)  OJ L 139, 12.6.1996.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 4177/97 by Daniel VARELA SUANZES- CARPEGNA to the Commission. Cohesion policy and culture
Date: 1998-01-21
Institutions: European Parliament, VARELA SUANZES-CARPEGNA
Subjects: EU programme, Structural Funds, cultural policy, culture, development plan, economic and social cohesion, job creation, public economy, regional development

C 196/94

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

22. 6. 98

(98/C 196/131)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4176/97

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE) to the Commission

(21 January 1998)

Subject: Cohesion policy and culture

Can  the  Commission  say  what  cultural  projects  were  cofinanced  in  the  context  of  the  Community  Initiative
programmes during the programming periods 1989-1993 and 1994-1999, specifying the countries involved, the
regional objective under which each project came, the total cost of execution and the amount cofinanced by the
Community?

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

(6 March 1998)

In  view  of  the  length  of  its  answer,  the  Commission  is  sending  it  direct  to  the  Honourable  Member  and  to
Parliament(cid:146)s Secretariat.

(98/C 196/132)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4177/97

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE) to the Commission

(21 January 1998)

Subject: Cohesion policy and culture

In its communication COM(96) 512 final, Cohesion Policy and Culture: A contribution to employment (page 4),
the Commission states that cultural activities are only eligible for funding under the Structural Funds if they
contribute to sustainable employment and form an integral part of local or regional development strategies.

Can  the  Commission  supply  data  concerning  the  contribution  made  to  employment  and  regional  or  local
development by the cultural projects cofinanced by the Structural Funds in the programming period 1989-1993
and the current programming period 1994-1999?

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

(17 February 1998)

The Commission emphasised in the communication that there is still a lack of precise knowledge of the link
between culture and regional or local employment creation. This is mainly due to the fact that the cultural sector
is not homogeneous and is contained within different programme priorities or statistical categories. Moreover,
there are significant variations of definition and statistical classification of culture between the Member States.
The communication therefore instead gives examples of successful initiatives and their estimated employment
effects.

(98/C 196/133)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4185/97

by Ba·rbara Du¤hrkop Du¤ hrkop (PSE) to the Council

(22 January 1998)

Subject: Ban on use of driftnets and the UK Presidency

Further to the decisions taken by the most recent Council of Ministers for Fisheries, what measures will the UK
Presidency propose to the Council to end the use of driftnets?