do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1316/98 by José GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL to the Commission. EURO 1999
Date: 1998-04-29
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Monetary System, Ireland, budget deficit, coordination of EMU policies, economic growth, economic stabilisation, national budget, public finance

C 31/34

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

5.2.1999

to meet the convergence criteria on the budgetary position. Moreover, paragraphs 9 and 11 of Article 104c, which
deal with sanctions, did not apply during stage two of EMU.

(1) OJ C 236, 2.8.1997.
(2) OJ L 209, 2.8.1997.

(1999/C 31/041)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1316/98

by JosØ Garc(cid:237)a-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(29 April 1998)

Subject: EURO 1999

As a result of the Pact for Stability and Growth adopted by the Amsterdam European Council in June 1997, the
Member States(cid:146) medium-term budgetary objective will be to achieve (cid:145)positions close to balance or in surplus(cid:146). If
the Member States continue their budgetary adjustments in subsequent years, their public finances will be in the
best position to tackle the budgetary consequences of a possible downturn in the economy.

But what does the Commission think would be the current situation in Ireland if the Stability Pact had been
applied during the period 1992-1997?

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission

(2 June 1998)

The stability and growth pact is constituted by a resolution of the European Council of 7 June 1997 (1), Council
Regulation (EC) 1466/97 of 7 July 1997 on the strengthening of the surveillance of budgetary positions and the
surveillance and coordination of economic policies (2), and Council Regulation (EC) No 1467 of 7 July 1997 on
speeding up and clarifying the implementation of the excessive deficit procedure2. The pact aims at fiscal
discipline in the economic and monetary union (EMU) thus creating the appropriate stability conditions for
sustained growth. It provides a powerful system of incentives for a Member State not to incur an excessive deficit
and to correct it rapidly if such a situation should occur.

In 1992, Ireland had a general government deficit of 2.5 % of gross domestic product (GDP). The deficit was
2.7 % of GDP in 1993. Ireland was never considered by the Council as having had an excessive deficit.

(1) OJ C 236, 2.8.1997.
(2) OJ L 209, 2.8.1997.

(1999/C 31/042)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1326/98

by Rolf Berend (PPE) to the Commission

(24 April 1998)

Subject: Mutual recognition of teaching diplomas in the EU

Is a German teaching diploma recognised as a full qualification in the EU and are the holders of such diplomas
entitled to work as teachers in other EU Member States?

Does this also apply to teachers working in the new German Federal L(cid:228)nder who acquired their diplomas in the
former GDR and have decades of practical experience to draw on?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(22 June 1998)

A number of legal instruments concerning the recognition of diplomas have been adopted at Community level so
as to facilitate effective exercise of freedom of movement as enshrined in the EC Treaty.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1315/98 by José GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL to the Commission. EURO 1999
Date: 1998-04-29
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Economic and Monetary Union, France, budget deficit, budget policy, budgetary discipline (EU), budgetary equilibrium, economic convergence, economic growth, economic stabilisation, public finance













EUR-Lex - 91998E1315 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91998E1315

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1315/98 by José GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL to the Commission. EURO 1999  


Official Journal C 031 , 05/02/1999 P. 0033 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1315/98by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission(29 April 1998)Subject: EURO 1999As a result of the Pact for Stability and Growth adopted by the Amsterdam European Council in June 1997, the Member States' medium-term budgetary objective will be to achieve "positions close to balance or in surplus". If the Member States continue their budgetary adjustments in subsequent years, their public finances will be in the best position to tackle the budgetary consequences of a possible downturn in the economy.But what does the Commission think would be the current situation in France if the Stability Pact had been applied during the period 1992-1997?Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission(2 June 1998)The stability and growth pact is constituted by a resolution of the European Council of 7 June 1997(1) and by Council Regulation (EC) 1466/97 of 7 July 1997 on the strengthening of the surveillance of budgetary positions and the surveillance and coordination of economic policies(2), and Council Regulation (EC) No 1467 of 7 July 1997 on speeding up and clarifying the implementation of the excessive deficit procedure2. The pact aims at fiscal discipline in the economic and monetary union (EMU) thus creating the appropriate stability conditions for sustained growth. It provides a powerful system of incentives for a Member State not to incur an excessive deficit and to correct it rapidly if such a situation should occur.In 1992, France had a general government deficit equal to 3.9 % of gross domestic product (GDP). This situation led to a Council decision of 26 September 1994 on the existence of an excessive deficit in France (Article 104c (6) of the EC Treaty). In the period covered by the Honourable Member's question, i.e. 1992 to 1997, France budgetary policy was mainly geared towards convergence, i.e. to correct the excessive deficit situation and thus to meet the convergence criteria on the budgetary position. Moreover, paragraphs 9 and 11 of Article 104c, which deal with sanctions, did not apply during stage two of EMU.(1) OJ C 236, 2.8.1997.(2) OJ L 209, 2.8.1997.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1162/98 by Amedeo AMADEO , Salvatore TATARELLA to the Commission. Pilot projects for new economic and social development models
Date: 1998-04-29
Institutions: AMADEO, European Parliament, TATARELLA
Subjects: EU financing, European Regional Development Fund, Italy, economic development, job creation, project evaluation, regional cooperation, social development

C 402/84

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

22.12.98

(98/C 402/104)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1158/98

by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission

(24 April 1998)

Subject: Housewives

I have seen an article in the press referring in vague terms to the existence of European legislation that recognises
the important role of housewives in modern society and seeks to uphold their status and their valuable role in the
family.

Would the Commission state:

1.

the main provisions of any such legislation;

2. whether any such legislation provides for the payment of Community funds for housewives (as claimed in

the abovementioned article);

3.

if so, how such funds may be obtained?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(29 May 1998)

Whilst recognising the importance of the tasks performed by housewives, with regard to both their families and
society as a whole, the Commission would like to inform the Honourable Member that there is no Community
legislation on this subject.

(98/C 402/105)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1162/98

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) and Salvatore Tatarella (NI) to the Commission

(29 April 1998)

Subject: Pilot projects for new economic and social development models

The Commission has earmarked ECU 103 million for 106 pilot projects to explore new social and economic
development models in European Union cities and regions, hoping to encourage thereby the emergence of new
instruments to create jobs. These pilot projects are to include actions designed to promote new forms of
employment, inter-regional cooperation, cultural events, promotion and innovation, regional initiatives concern-
ing the information society and innovative measures to assist urban development.

Could the Commission state whether the projects selected include any relating to Italy, and outline their main
features?

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

(28 May 1998)

25 projects in Italy have been approved under Article 10 of the European regional development fund (ERDF)
Regulation (1) for support during the current funding period up to 1999. 27.5 MECU have been granted for these
projects within an expenditure total of MECU 50. The list of projects is transmitted directly to the Honourable
Members and to the Secretariat General of the Parliament.

(1) OJ L 193, 31.7.1993.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1313/98 by José GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL to the Commission. EURO 1999
Date: 1998-04-29
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Community budget, Spain, budget deficit, coordination of EMU policies, currency adjustment, economic convergence, economic growth, economic stabilisation, multilateral surveillance, public finance













EUR-Lex - 91998E1313 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91998E1313

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1313/98 by José GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL to the Commission. EURO 1999  


Official Journal C 050 , 22/02/1999 P. 0026 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1313/98by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission(29 April 1998)Subject: EURO 1999As a result of the Pact for Stability and Growth adopted by the Amsterdam European Council in June 1997, the Member States' medium-term budgetary objective will be to achieve "positions close to balance or in surplus". If the Member States continue their budgetary adjustments in subsequent years, their public finances will be in the best position to tackle the budgetary consequences of a possible downturn in the economy.But what does the Commission think would be the current situation in Spain if the Stability Pact had been applied during the period 1992-1997?Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission(2 June 1998)The stability and growth pact is constituted by a resolution of the European Council of 7 June 1997(1), by Council Regulation (EC) 1466/97 on the strengthening of the surveillance of budgetary positions and the surveillance and coordination of economic policies(2) and by Council Regulation (EC) 1467/97 of 7 July 1997 on speeding up and clarifying the implementation of the excessive deficit procedure(3). The pact aims at fiscal discipline in the economic and monetary union (EMU) thus creating the appropriate stability conditions for sustained growth. It provides a powerful system of incentives for a Member State not to incur an excessive deficit and to correct it rapidly if such a situation should occur.In 1992, Spain had a general government deficit of 3,8 % of gross domestic product (GDP) and in 1993 the deficit was 6,9 % of GDP. this situation led to a Council decision of 26 September 1994 on the existence of an excessive deficit in Spain (Article 104c (6) of the EC Treaty). In the period covered by the Honourable Member's question, i.e. 1992 to 1997, Spain budgetary policy was mainly geared towards convergence, i.e. to correct the excessive deficit situation and thus to meet the convergence criteria on the budgetary position. Moreover, paragraphs 9 and 11 of Article 104c of the EC Treaty, which deal with sanctions, did not apply during stage two of EMU.(1) OJ C 236, 2.8.1997.(2) OJ L 209, 2.8.1997.(3) OJ L 209, 2.8.1997.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1340/98 by José GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL to the Commission. The euro and 1999
Date: 1998-04-29
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Monetary System, economic convergence, member country, national budget, public administration, public debt, public finance, third stage of EMU













EUR-Lex - 91998E1340 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91998E1340

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1340/98 by José GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL to the Commission. The euro and 1999  


Official Journal C 031 , 05/02/1999 P. 0035 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1340/98by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission(29 April 1998)Subject: The euro and 1999On page 110 of the Commission's report of 25 March 1998 (state of convergence and recommendations for the transition to the third stage of EMU), it is stated: "over recent years governments cut their extension of loans and accelerated the reimbursement of outstanding loans [and] also reduced their liquid working balances held on bank accounts and increased operations which allow for the consolidation of claims and liabilities within the government sector".Can the Commission explain what type of operations it is referring to?Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission(3 June 1998)The definition of debt retained for the monitoring of budgetary convergence is that of general government gross debt, consolidated between and within the sectors of general government.Thus, only government indebtedness towards the rest of the economy is taken into consideration, while those government liabilities which correspond to financial assets held within the government sector are excluded. To establish figures for government debt in accordance with this definition, government debt held within the government sector itself is netted out.In recent years, Member States have limited their government debt through recourse to increased consolidation, by inducing those government agencies which hold significant portfolios of financial assets to invest a growing proportion of their assets into government paper. For example, social security funds in Denmark and Finland have been restructuring their portfolio towards increased holdings of government debt over recent years. In Finland, such consolidation operations amounted to 4.5 % of the gross domestic product (GDP) in 1995.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1228/98 by Marie-Paule KESTELIJN- SIERENS to the Commission. Distance between airports and residential areas
Date: 1998-04-29
Institutions: European Parliament, KESTELIJN-SIERENS
Subjects: air quality, airport, building permit, environmental protection, noise, residential area













EUR-Lex - 91998E1228 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91998E1228

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1228/98 by Marie-Paule KESTELIJN- SIERENS to the Commission. Distance between airports and residential areas  


Official Journal C 402 , 22/12/1998 P. 0096 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1228/98by Marie-Paule Kestelijn-Sierens (ELDR) to the Commission(29 April 1998)Subject: Distance between airports and residential areas1. Does the Commission have any data on the minimum distances from runways required by the legislation of the Member States for the granting of (a) house building permits and (b) authorization to expand the airport?2. Does it possess data on the distances actually applied between residential areas and runways in the airports of the Member States?3. Does the Commission have no plans to set European standards in this area so as to improve the protection of local residents and of citizens in general from noise pollution and the unpleasant smell of kerosene?Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission(29 May 1998)1. The Commission does not have information concerning the minimum distance from the runway legally imposed by Member States for the purpose of planning permission on runway extension. Recommendations in this area are made by the International Civil Aviation Organisation. Such recommendations are not legally binding.2. The Commission does not have representative data concerning the distances between runways and built-up areas, which are applied in the different Member States.3. The Commission does not envisage the establishment of binding minimum standards in this area.However, it intends to issue a communication on Air Transport and the Environment by the end of the year. Environmental issues arising in and around airports will be among the matters dealt with in that document.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1337/98 by Glyn FORD to the Commission. Funding a Mox text facility
Date: 1998-04-29
Institutions: European Parliament, FORD
Subjects: EU financing, International Atomic Energy Agency, Joint Research Centre, nuclear fuel, nuclear safety, plutonium, safety standard, testing, uranium

22.12.98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 402/113

(98/C 402/146)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1335/98

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(29 April 1998)

Subject: Development of a MOX (plutonium and uranium) reactor fuel

Relating to the arrangements for the disposal of radioactive wastes and with reference to the other option for
handling plutonium, that is the immobilization route for separated plutonium, what funding is available for this
route?

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission

(29 June 1998)

Within the nuclear fission safety programme(cid:146)s research area on exploring innovative approaches, some
theoretical studies have been undertaken on the use of (cid:145)advanced(cid:146) mixed oxide fuels (MOX) for transmutation
of plutonium. In addition, the Commission has been studying over several years the characterization of MOX fuel
and its behaviour. Funding of research and technological development has also been provided in the area of spent
fuel immobilization, namely in deep geological repositories. However, there is no Community support provided
for investment in the immobilisation of spent fuel or the fabrication of MOX.

(98/C 402/147)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1337/98

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(29 April 1998)

Subject: Funding a Mox text facility

Further to the answer given to Written Question E-2891/97 (1), can the Commission say what body is responsible
for setting the standards for the tests in the Low Dispersible Materials test facility?

(1) OJ C 158, 25.5.1998, p. 17.

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission

(23 June 1998)

The genesis of a material such as LDM (low dispersible material) must be approved by the competent authorities
concerned. It will be up to those safety authorities to establish the methodology to be used in qualifying LDM in
accordance with the criteria recommended by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) › where
appropriate in experimental facilities. The Joint Research Centre (JRC) could be such a facility.

(98/C 402/148)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1338/98

by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission

(29 April 1998)

Subject: Habitats Directive and Berne Convention

What steps is the Commission taking to ensure that it agrees on the inclusion in the annexes of the Berne
Convention and the Emerald Network the key species which have been left out of the Annexes of the Habitats
Directive?
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1288/98 by Reino PAASILINNA to the Commission. Public finances and EMU
Date: 1998-04-29
Institutions: European Parliament, PAASILINNA
Subjects: Economic and Monetary Union, budget policy, closing of accounts, job security, public expenditure, public finance, public sector, public service













EUR-Lex - 91998E1288 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91998E1288

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1288/98 by Reino PAASILINNA to the Commission. Public finances and EMU  


Official Journal C 402 , 22/12/1998 P. 0107 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1288/98by Reino Paasilinna (PSE) to the Commission(29 April 1998)Subject: Public finances and EMUThe requirement laid down in the Waigel stability pact that public deficit should remain below 3 % of GDP has caused difficulties in the public sector. Unemployment in the EU Member States may continue to grow if a strict and inflexible 3 % requirement is applied to the public sector. The existing penalties procedure may also exacerbate the situation in the Member States.An economic policy which keeps a tight lid on public finances by means of cuts and reducing the size of the workforce may cause further unemployment and public uncertainty in the initial stages of EMU. Therefore the stability pact should include enough room for manoeuvre to allow the limit to be temporarily exceeded.That being so, what does the Commission propose to do to protect jobs in the public sector in those Member States where workers are being laid off and sacked in the interests of a strict and inflexible public deficit requirement?Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission(19 June 1998)Since the approval by the Council of the first broad economic policy guidelines in 1994, the economic policy line of the Community in the budgetary field has been that budgetary consolidation in the Member States is the most adequate way to restore room for manoeuvre in the field of public finances and to promote a strong "crowding-in" of private investment and productive capacity in Europe. These budgetary policies also contribute to the achievement of a balanced, stability-oriented policy mix favourable to growth and employment. Indeed the historical experience of high-debt Member States has amply demonstrated that the huge build-up of debt charges that unavoidably follows uncontrolled deficits and debt expansion severely hampers the ability to maintain an adequate level of public services.These consolidation efforts should be made in a socially balanced way without impinging on the quality of government services but through increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of government spending and favouring productive activities such as infrastructure investment, human capital improvement and active labour market policies.However, within these general principles and the requirements of policy co-ordination as expressed in the Amsterdam Treaty, the responsibility of taking the precise budgetary measures corresponding to these policies belongs entirely to Member States according to their specific budgetary procedures, in line with the subsidiarity principle.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1173/98 by Ulf HOLM to the Commission. Conversion aid
Date: 1998-04-29
Institutions: European Parliament, HOLM
Subjects: agrarian reform, production aid, redevelopment aid, redirection of production, tobacco, use of aid

18.1.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 13/23

A brochure on the LIFE environment projects will shortly be published, together with a description of the most
successful projects.

A multilingual brochure on LIFE nature projects is published annually, together with a description of all of the
projects receiving money. A copy of the 1997 edition has been sent to the Honourable Members and to the
Secretariat General of Parliament.

(1) OJ C 68, 4.3.1998.

(1999/C 13/032)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1173/98

by Ulf Holm (V) to the Commission

(29 April 1998)

Subject: Conversion aid

Can the Commission clarify what amounts are earmarked in the budget for aid to farmers wishing to stop growing
tobacco and convert to an alternative crop?

Have the funds for this budget item increased or decreased over the last three years? Will the Commission be
proposing an increase or a decrease in the forthcoming budget?

Can the Commission also say what the take-up rate is for these conversion aids? Does the take-up rate differ
among the various Member States?

Which are the most common alternative crops chosen?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(29 May 1998)

The Commission informs the Honourable Member that the current organisation of the market in raw tobacco
makes no provision for Community aid for producers who want to stop growing tobacco in favour of some other
crop.

As part of the reform of the raw tobacco market that it submitted recently to Parliament and the Council (1), the
Commission proposes setting up a system under which the public authorities will buy back the quotas of
producers wishing to abandon tobacco cultivation.

(1) COM(98) 19 final.

(1999/C 13/033)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1174/98

by Ulf Holm (V) to the Council

(23 April 1998)

Subject: Transport of animals

EU Agriculture Ministers meeting in December 1997 reportedly agreed on a compromise over detailed rules for
long-distance transport of animals. It has proved difficult, however, to ascertain the precise implications of the
new rules. Nevertheless, the media have reported that the new detailed rules are too lax and will not improve the
situation of the animals, particularly in regard to ventilation.

Can the Council clarify the new rules and say in what way they will make the transport of animals less cruel and
barbaric?