do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 232/98 by Antonios TRAKATELLIS , Giorgos DIMITRAKOPOULOS to the Commission. Reduction in CAP expenditure and adoption of measures to modernize agriculture
Date: 1998-02-13
Institutions: DIMITRAKOPOULOS, European Parliament, TRAKATELLIS
Subjects: Community budget, EAGGF, budgetary assessment, budgetary expenditure, common agricultural policy, multiannual financial framework, reform of the CAP, young farmer













EUR-Lex - 91998E0232 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91998E0232

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 232/98 by Antonios TRAKATELLIS , Giorgos DIMITRAKOPOULOS to the Commission. Reduction in CAP expenditure and adoption of measures to modernize agriculture  


Official Journal C 223 , 17/07/1998 P. 0143 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0232/98 by Antonios Trakatellis (PPE) and Giorgos Dimitrakopoulos (PPE) to the Commission (13 February 1998)Subject: Reduction in CAP expenditure and adoption of measures to modernize agricultureIn view of the comprehensive overhaul of the Common Agricultural Policy and the future challenges facing it in the EU described by the Commission in Agenda 2000, will the Commission answer the following questions:1. How much was made available by the regional funds to cover CAP expenditure and for structural interventions in the field of agriculture and stockbreeding in Objective 1 regions for the 1992-1997 period, broken down by year and Member State?2. What is the percentage reduction of EAGGF, Guarantee Section, spending and how much is this in ecu compared with the overall budgets for the 1992-1997 period, broken down by year and Member State?3. What was the trend in EAGGF, Guidance Section, spending (percentage and amounts) compared to total EAGGF spending and compared with the total budgets for the 1992-1997 period, broken down by year and Member State?4. What measures as regards modernization, structural intervention and programmes did the Community take in respect of the CAP and what sums were made available for the implementation thereof from the budgets of the 1992-1997 period, broken down by year and Member State?5. What measures and programmes were adopted for young farmers and the introduction of new technologies in farm holdings and in the stockbreeding sector and what sums were allocated during the 1992-1997 period, broken down by year and Member State?6. Is there any correlation in absolute terms (ecu) between the reduction of agricultural spending of the EAGGF, Guarantee Section, and the development of modernization and intervention measures for agriculture for the 1992-1997 period, broken down by year and Member State?7. What specific measures will be taken to check the steady decline in agricultural incomes and what steps can be taken to ensure the development of a modern, competitive and self -sufficient agricultural sector in the EU, faced with the challenges of international competition and the forthcoming enlargement of the EU?Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (11 March 1998)The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 260/98 by Alexandros ALAVANOS to the Commission. Exclusion of producers from compensation
Date: 1998-02-13
Institutions: ALAVANOS, European Parliament
Subjects: Greece, State aid, aid to agriculture, anti-discriminatory measure, application of EU law, control of State aid, exclusion from treatment (EU), indemnification, natural disaster













EUR-Lex - 91998E0260 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91998E0260

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 260/98 by Alexandros ALAVANOS to the Commission. Exclusion of producers from compensation  


Official Journal C 223 , 17/07/1998 P. 0149 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0260/98 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (13 February 1998)Subject: Exclusion of producers from compensationIn its reply to my Question No E-1774/97 ((OJ C 21, 22.1.1998, p. 94. )) on producers ineligible for compensation, the Commission states that it is investigating the matter in the Member State in question (Greece). Will the Commission now say whether, following the investigations it has carried out, the Member State has correctly interpreted the terms of Regulation (EEC) No 2328/91 ((OJ L 218, 6.8.1991, p. 1. )) in excluding from the programme of compensation 'any person, and members of their family, who have been convicted or are awaiting prosecution for offences under public criminal law, before their release or before final judgment is passed'?Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (19 March 1998)Over the past few months Greece has notified the Commission under Article 93(3) of the EC Treaty of several compensation measures for losses suffered by farmers because of natural disasters (floods, hail, fire, heavy snowfall, etc).Conformity of such measures is examined under the terms of Article 92(2)(b) of the EC Treaty. To apply that provision, the Commission drew up a framework requiring a minimum intensity of damage to aid recipients and stipulating that excessive compensation must not be paid for damage incurred. Within that framework, restriction of the aid to a region, crop or type of farmer is a political choice for which responsibility is borne entirely by the national authorities and this cannot be challenged under Articles 92 to 94 of the EC Treaty.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 224/98 by Christine CRAWLEY to the Commission. The impact of changing work patterns
Date: 1998-02-13
Institutions: CRAWLEY, European Parliament
Subjects: continuing education, market research, organisation of work, population ageing, social security, vocational training













EUR-Lex - 91998E0224 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91998E0224

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 224/98 by Christine CRAWLEY to the Commission. The impact of changing work patterns  


Official Journal C 304 , 02/10/1998 P. 0056 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0224/98 by Christine Crawley (PSE) to the Commission (13 February 1998)Subject: The impact of changing work patternsWould the Commission provide information on the extent to which it is discussing the implications of changing work patterns?Is it satisfied that coordination within Commission departments on the issues of changing work patterns such as education and training, the effects on social insurance and the ageing of the population, is conducive to a consistent Commission overview of the future of work patterns for our citizens?Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (9 March 1998)With the adoption of the green paper 'Partnership for a New Organisation of Work' ((COM(97) 128 final. )), the Commission initiated a debate on the implications of changing work patterns. The green paper has been widely distributed and a series of conferences and round tables held in Member States bringing together people in labour market organisations and from research, education and training institutes. This wide-ranging European debate will be concluded at a European conference to be held on 28-30 April 1998 in Glasgow, jointly organised by the United Kingdom Presidency and the Commission.The importance and challenge of co-ordination across the relevant policy areas is fully appreciated by the Commission and the necessary inter-service collaboration has been put in place, to facilitate a coherent overview and approach.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 222/98 by Markus FERBER to the Commission. EU aid from the social and regional funds for Bavarian Swabia (SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER)
Date: 1998-02-13
Institutions: European Parliament, FERBER
Subjects: Bavaria, EAGGF Guidance Section, European Regional Development Fund, European Social Fund, FIFG, Structural Funds, aid to agriculture, development region, employment aid, rural region

5.2.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 31/1

I

(Information)

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

WRITTEN QUESTIONS WITH ANSWER

(1999/C 31/001)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2691/97

by James Provan (PPE) to the Commission

(1 September 1997)

Subject: Use of European Regional Development Funds in Sobral, Portugal

It has been drawn to my attention that EU grants are being made twice to people in Sobral, Porches, Portugal;
once for orange-growing subsidies on land recently cleared, and once for the destruction of those new orange
trees to make way for infrastructure development in the form of the new autoroute, the Via Infante de Sagres.

What controls does the Commission employ to ensure that the projects qualifying for ERDF funds are not being
used by the national authorities to pay compensation for land which has already been in receipt of EU subsidy for
other purposes?

Supplementary answer
given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(8 May 1998)

In the absence of more precise information (the beneficiaries(cid:146) names, exact location of the holdings concerned,
year of grant of aid), the Commission is not in a position to check whether the aid for orange-growing was
actually awarded. It is worth pointing out in this connection that any subsidy would have been conditional on
maintaining the new plantings for a minimum of five-years.

With regard to the construction of the Sobral-Algarve sections of the (cid:145)Via do Infante de Sagres(cid:146), the Portuguese
authorities have confirmed in a letter dated 13 March 1998 that no funding from the European Regional
Development Fund was awarded for these road sections. In the circumstances, the question of whether
Community funding was awarded twice to the same people does not arise.

(1999/C 31/002)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0222/98

by Markus Ferber (PPE) to the Commission

(13 February 1998)

Subject: EU aid from the social and regional funds for Bavarian Swabia

Can the Commission provide the following information on EU economic and regional aid for the region of
Bavarian Swabia:

1. How much EU structural aid › broken down by fund and Community initiative › went to that region in

1997?

2. What sum went to agriculture?
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 356/98 of 13 February 1998 fixing the maximum export refund on wholly milled medium grain and long grain A rice in connection with the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 2095/97
Date: 1998-02-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: award of contract, export refund, rice, third country

L 42/16

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

14. 2. 98

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 356/98

of 13 February 1998

fixing the maximum export refund on wholly milled medium grain and long
grain A rice in connection with the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC)
No 2095/97

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 3072/95 of
22 December 1995 on the common organization of the
market in rice (1), as amended by Regulation (EC) No
192/98 (2), and in particular Article 13 (3) thereof,

Whereas an invitation to tender for the export refund on
rice was issued pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC)
No 2095/97 (3);

Whereas Article 5 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No
584/75 (4), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 299/
95 (5), allows the Commission to fix, in accordance with
the procedure laid down in Article 22 of Regulation (EC)
No 3072/95 and on the basis of the tenders submitted, a
this
maximum export
maximum, the criteria provided for in Article 13 of Regu-
lation (EC) No 3072/95 must be taken into account;
whereas a contract is awarded to any tenderer whose
tender is equal to or less than the maximum export
refund;

refund; whereas

in fixing

Whereas the application of the abovementioned criteria
to the current market situation for the rice in question
results in the maximum export refund being fixed at the
amount specified in Article 1;

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

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The maximum export refund on wholly milled medium
grain and long grain A rice to be exported to certain
third countries pursuant to the invitation to tender issued
in Regulation (EC) No 2095/97 is hereby fixed on the
basis of the tenders submitted from 9 to 12 February
1998 at ECU 118 per tonne.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 14 February
1998.

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

Done at Brussels, 13 February 1998.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 329, 30. 12. 1995, p. 18.
(2) OJ L 20, 27. 1. 1998, p. 16.
(3) OJ L 292, 25. 10. 1997, p. 16.
(4) OJ L 61, 7. 3. 1975, p. 25.
(5) OJ L 35, 15. 2. 1995, p. 8.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 258/98 by Hiltrud BREYER to the Commission. Occupational and general disability (SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER)
Date: 1998-02-13
Institutions: BREYER, European Parliament
Subjects: accident prevention, health policy, incapacity for work, occupational accident, occupational accident insurance, occupational safety

C 402/6

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

22.12.98

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(6 May 1998)

The Commission has no jurisdiction to deal with the matter at issue. It does not enjoy access to files kept by the
Schengen information system in order to check whether the names of certain individuals appear. In accordance
with the provisions of the Schengen Convention, only the person concerned may have access to data concerning
him.

Notifications for purposes of non-admission are made by the Member State or Member States concerned on a
request from the judicial or administrative authority in accordance with domestic law.

(98/C 402/005)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0201/98

by Gerhard Hager (NI) to the Commission

(11 February 1998)

Subject: Tightening up the directive on control of the acquisition and possession of weapons

There have recently been dreadful examples of violence with weapons in several Member States.

In the light of these dreadful events, does the Commission have any plans to tighten up Council Directive
91/477/EEC (1) on control of the acquisition and possession of weapons?

(1) OJ L 256, 13.9.1991, p. 51.

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(6 May 1998)

Directive 91/477/EEC on control of the acquisition and possession of arms was adopted as an accompanying
measure to the removal of controls at internal frontiers.

As to the facts referred to by the Honourable Member, the Commission is not aware that they have brought to
light any shortcomings in the control procedures and formalities introduced by the Directive for intra-Community
movements of weapons.

It would also point out that Article 3 of the Directive allows Member States to introduce in their legislation a more
stringent classification of weapons than that provided for in the Directive. Lastly, Article 2 stipulates that the
Directive is without prejudice to the application of national provisions concerning the carrying of weapons.

This being so, the Commission plans to examine, in the report it will draw up on the application of the Directive,
various aspects of the latter(cid:146)s operation and impact. The public order and public safety aspects will be covered by
the report.

(98/C 402/006)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0258/98

by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission

(13 February 1998)

Subject: Occupational and general disability

All the EU Member States are naturally interested in maintaining their gross national product. This can only be
achieved if adequate precautions are taken in the field of health, consumer and labour protection.
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 354/98 of 13 February 1998 fixing the maximum export refund on wholly milled long grain rice in connection with the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 2097/97
Date: 1998-02-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: award of contract, export refund, rice, third country

L 42/14

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

14. 2. 98

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 354/98

of 13 February 1998

fixing the maximum export refund on wholly milled long grain rice in connec-
tion with the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 2097/97

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 3072/95 of
22 December 1995 on the common organization of the
market in rice (1), as amended by Regulation (EC) No
192/98 (2), and in particular Article 13 (3) thereof,

Whereas an invitation to tender for the export refund on
rice was issued pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC)
No 2097/97 (3);

Whereas, Article 5 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No
584/75 (4), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 299/
95 (5), allows the Commission to fix, in accordance with
the procedure laid down in Article 22 of Regulation (EC)
No 3072/95 and on the basis of the tenders submitted, a
maximum export
this
maximum, the criteria provided for in Article 13 of Regu-
lation (EC) No 3072/95 must be taken into account;
whereas a contract is awarded to any tenderer whose
tender is equal to or less than the maximum export
refund;

refund; whereas

in fixing

Whereas the application of the abovementioned criteria
to the current market situation for the rice in question
results in the maximum export refund being fixed at the
amount specified in Article 1;

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

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The maximum export refund on wholly milled long
grain rice falling within CN code 1006 30 67 to be
exported to certain third countries pursuant to the invita-
tion to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 2097/97 is
hereby fixed on the basis of the tenders submitted from 9
to 12 February 1998 at ECU 321 per tonne.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 14 February
1998.

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

Done at Brussels, 13 February 1998.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 329, 30. 12. 1995, p. 18.
(2) OJ L 20, 27. 1. 1998, p. 16.
(3) OJ L 292, 25. 10. 1997, p. 22.
(4) OJ L 61, 7. 3. 1975, p. 25.
(5) OJ L 35, 15. 2. 1995, p. 8.
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 361/98 of 13 February 1998 amending Regulation (EC) No 265/98 on the supply of milk products as food aid
Date: 1998-02-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: food aid, health certificate, invitation to tender, skimmed milk powder, third country, veterinary inspection

L 42/32

‹

EN

‹

Official Journal of the European Communities

14. 2. 98

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 361/98

of 13 February 1998

amending Regulation (EC) No 265/98 on the supply of milk products as food aid

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1292/96 of
27 June 1996 on food-aid policy and food-aid manage-
ment and special operations in support of food security (1),
and in particular Article 24(1)(b) thereof,

Whereas Commission Regulation (EC) No 265/98 (2)
issued an invitation to tender for the supply, as food aid,
of milk products; whereas some of the conditions speci-
fied in the Annex to that Regulation should be altered,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

— health certificate issued by an official entity
stating that the product was processed under
excellent sanitary conditions which are super-
vised by qualified technical personnel. The
certificate must state the temperature and dura-
tion of the pasteurisation (A2: UHT treatment:
110 HC/228Z or 114 HC/130Z or 120 HC/60Z or
140 HC/25Z), the temperature and duration in
the spray-drying-tower and the expiry date for
consumption,

— veterinary certificate issued by an official entity
stating that the area of production of raw milk
had not registered foot-and-mouth disease nor
any
infectious/contagious
disease during the 12 months prior to the
processing.’

notifiable

other

Note 5 of the Annex to Regulation (EC) No 265/98 is
replaced by the following:

Article 2

‘(5) The supplier shall supply to the beneficiary or its
the following docu-

representative, on delivery,
ments:

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, 13 February 1998.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 166, 5. 7. 1996, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 25, 31. 1. 1998, p. 63.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 223/98 by Ursula SCHLEICHER to the Commission. Experts and consultants employed by the Commission
Date: 1998-02-13
Institutions: European Parliament, SCHLEICHER
Subjects: European Commission, administrator, disclosure of information, division of powers, fact-finding mission, self-employed person, statistics

17. 7. 98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 223/141

Paragraphs 2 to 4 provide that the Commission shall assess those amounts and then adopt an outline plan of
co-financing action. Since no assessments have been received from the Member States the Commission has so
far been unable to prepare any such action plan.

Conversely it is dealing with its future adoption by proposing that implementation of Natura 2000 should form
part of the activities that are eligible under the structural funds and the common agricultural policy.

(98/C 223/184)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0222/98

by Markus Ferber (PPE) to the Commission

(13 February 1998)

Subject: EU aid from the social and regional funds for Bavarian Swabia

Can  the  Commission  provide  the  following  information  on  EU  economic  and  regional  aid  for  the  region  of
Bavarian Swabia:

1.  How much EU structural aid › broken down by fund and Community initiative › went to that region in

1997?

2.  What sum went to agriculture?

3.  How many jobs were created with EU economic and regional aid in the region of Bavarian Swabia in 1997?

4.  How much EU structural aid went to comparable regions in other Member States in 1997?

5.  How many jobs were created with EU economic and regional aid in comparable regions in other Member

States in 1997?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(16 March 1998)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as
soon as possible.

(98/C 223/185)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0223/98

by Ursula Schleicher (PPE) to the Commission

(13 February 1998)

Subject: Experts and consultants employed by the Commission

Can  the  Commission  provide  information  on  experts  and  consultants  employed  by  the  Commission  since
1 January 1997:

1.  How many national experts are there?

(a)  What is the breakdown of national experts by Member State?
(b)  Can the Commission supply a list of names of German experts?

2.  How many temporary agents are employed by the Commission as consultants or in category A?

(a)  What is the breakdown by Member State
(b)  Can the Commission supply a list of names of German temporary agents?
(c)  What period of contract has been agreed in each case?

3.  How many consultants(cid:146) contracts has the Commission concluded?