do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2124/98 by Klaus LUKAS to the Commission. Cadmium
Date: 1998-07-10
Institutions: European Parliament, LUKAS
Subjects: Austria, EU programme, fertiliser, soil conditioning, toxic substance













EUR-Lex - 91998E2124 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91998E2124

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2124/98 by Klaus LUKAS to the Commission. Cadmium  


Official Journal C 135 , 14/05/1999 P. 0017 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2124/98by Klaus Lukas (NI) to the Commission(10 July 1998)Subject: CadmiumIn connection with the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the placing on the market of fertilizers containing cadmium, the Commission is seeking a further extension of the existing derogations. The Commission intends the extra time to be used mainly for further studies of the impact of fertilizers containing cadmium.The hazards associated with cadmium are adequately known. Why, in spite of this, does the Commission wish to carry out further studies on the subject?On what scale are they to be carried out?Who is to carry them out?How long does the Commission expect them to take?What costs will be involved?What new information does the Commission expect to gain from them?How will the findings be used?Which EU Member States are preventing the EU, for example, from adopting Austria's limit values for fertilizers containing cadmium, and on what grounds?In Austria, for example, the limit values for fertilizers containing cadmium were introduced after thorough research. Will the Commission use the research on which they were based?If not, does the Commission regard the research already carried out, for example, in Austria as being insufficiently scientific?Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission(28. September 1998)It is known that there are dangers associated with cadmium, but the danger to humans and the environment from cadmium in fertilisers is insufficiently known. The quantities of cadmium which can be taken up by plants and enter the food chain depend on climate, soil conditions, and other environmental factors which are very different in Member States. Only in a few Member States is sufficient information available, and not enough is known at European level to form a basis for Community decisions.The Commission therefore, with the agreement and participation of Member States, initiated in June 1998 a programme of studies by consultants, at a total cost of some ECU 120 000. It aims to increase information at European level, concentrating on sensitive population groups and vulnerable environments. Final results are expected at the end of 2000, to allow the Commission to propose possible Community measures in 2001.The programme depends on the active participation of Member States, and Austria is playing an important role in the review of the need for Community action. All relevant information in the possession of Member States, including Austria, will be needed to ensure the success of the programme.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2173/98 by Georg JARZEMBOWSKI to the Commission. Customs regulations in Russia
Date: 1998-07-10
Institutions: European Parliament, JARZEMBOWSKI
Subjects: Russia, carriage of goods, carrier, consumer goods, customs cooperation, customs fraud, customs regulations, export, export policy, trade restriction

29.4.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 118/37

Following the occurrence of the earthquake in the Adana region, the Turkish authorities confirmed that all
necessary security measures had been taken regarding the future Akkuyu nuclear power station. No
construction has yet begun on site. With regard to the future Akkuyu nuclear plant, the Honourable
Member should refer also to the Commission(cid:146)s answer to Written Questions E-1876/98 and E-2190/98 by
Mr Kaklamanis.

(1999/C 118/043)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2170/98

by Helena Torres Marques (PSE) to the Commission

Subject: State aid allocated by Germany and France

(3 July 1998)

Can the Commission say how much State aid was allocated by France and Germany in 1997 and what
amounts these countries gave to the EU in that same year?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(10 September 1998)

Information on state aids can be found in the Commission(cid:146)s recent survey on state aid in the European
Union in the manufacturing and certain other sectors (1).

The Community budget is financed by traditional own resources, and by VAT and GNP own resources. In
1997, Germany(cid:146)s share in total Community budget resources was 28,2 %, in traditional own resources
24,2 %, and in VAT and GNP resources 29,1 % (traditional own resources ECU 3 432 million, VAT
ECU 10 503 million and GNP ECU 7 281 million).

Also in 1997, France(cid:146)s share in total Community budget resources was 17,5 %, in traditional own
resources 10,9 %, and in VAT and GNP resources 19,0 % (traditional own resources ECU 1 550 million,
VAT ECU 6 842 and GNP ECU 4 793).

(1) COM(98) 417 final.

(1999/C 118/044)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2173/98

by Georg Jarzembowski (PPE) to the Commission

Subject: Customs regulations in Russia

(10 July 1998)

The Russian Federation has been seeking for some time to exclude specific groups of goods from the
simplified import procedure governed by the International TIR Carnet Convention. Under Decrees 513
and 70 › at present withdrawn or deferred › imports of certain goods (chocolate and other food
preparations containing cocoa, television receivers, cars and other motor vehicles, furnishings and
furniture components) cease to be governed by the TIR Carnet Convention and are subject instead to
Russia(cid:146)s transit procedure. Application of the national transit procedure to these groups of goods would
constitute a market barrier to foreigners as the procedure is particularly impractical for foreigners from the
EU Member States.

Russian Instruction No 01-14/510 of 13 May 1998, which provisionally replaces Decree No 70, requires a
large customs deposit or, alternatively, a customs escort at the carrier(cid:146)s expense. This customs escort has
entailed extra costs of up to $US 2 000 per journey for foreign carriers.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2207/98 by Katerina DASKALAKI to the Commission. Destruction of woodland greenbelts in Attica
Date: 1998-07-10
Institutions: DASKALAKI, European Parliament
Subjects: Peloponnese, deforestation, engineering structure, environmental impact, expressway, forest conservation, impact study, road building, underground transport













EUR-Lex - 91998E2207 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91998E2207

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2207/98 by Katerina DASKALAKI to the Commission. Destruction of woodland greenbelts in Attica  


Official Journal C 031 , 05/02/1999 P. 0132 





WRITTEN QUESTION P-2207/98by Katerina Daskalaki (UPE) to the Commission(10 July 1998)Subject: Destruction of woodland greenbelts in AtticaThe Commission is known to be concerned about the destruction of the environment in Europe, notably in areas such as the Attica Basin where the environment is already under particular pressure. A plan is currently afoot to destroy a large area of the Hymettos forest, the densest woodlands around Athens; this is one of the few remaining greenbelts around this European capital which faces particularly severe environmental problems. The destruction of 30 hectares of forest is planned in order to make way for a surface ring road. One solution to this problem would be to open a tunnel: the Athens Polytechnic has already drawn up a realistic study for such a project, but it has been rejected on cost grounds. Local municipalities have mobilized in order to avert this destruction. Given that the European Union is helping to fund this project through the Community Support Framework, will the Commission say whether it intends to intervene in good time in order to save the woodlands and, if so, how?Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission(3 September 1998)The Greek authorities have informed the Commission that the final study for the Imitos ring road, connecting the new Spata airport to the southern part of Athens, envisages the construction of an underground 4.5 km section, i.e. 37.5 % of the overall length (12 km). The Greek authorities confirm that they have examined all the alternative tunnel solutions and have chosen the optimum solution from the point of view of transport and the environment.According to the information received from the Greek authorities, an environmental impact study was carried out for the project in question and environmental conditions were approved by a ministerial decision, in accordance with national and Community provisions. The contents of this decision were incorporated in the law voted by the Greek Parliament for Spata international airport(1).(1) Greek law No 2338 (Greek OJ No 2002a of 14.9.1995).
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2237/98 by Undine-Uta BLOCH von BLOTTNITZ to the Commission. Hunting of goosander
Date: 1998-07-10
Institutions: BLOCH VON BLOTTNITZ, European Parliament
Subjects: Bavaria, bird, hunting regulations, protected species, protection of animal life, wildlife

C 31/134

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

5.2.1999

(1999/C 31/185)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2237/98

by Undine-Uta Bloch von Blottnitz (V) to the Commission

(10 July 1998)

Subject: Hunting of goosander

If in the near future the Bavarian Parliament adopts the proposal for a decision from its Environment Committee
of 25 June 1998, it will soon be possible to hunt goosander again in Bavaria. According to ornithological reports
there are, however, only 300 breeding pairs of this species in Bavaria. Mergus merganser appears on the Red List
in Germany as a particularly endangered species.

Under the provisions of Annex II of the Wild Birds Directive (79/409/EEC) (1) the EU leaves authorization
1.
to hunt goosander to the discretion of the Member States. Does the Commission consider the goosander
population in Bavaria to be really large enough and the reasons for the authorization to hunt these rare birds
sufficient to be able to justify this step by the Bavarian Land government?

Is the Commission aware of the population trends for goosander in Germany, and in Bavaria in particular?

2.
If so, what information is available and how is it assessed by the Commission?

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979, p.1.

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(30 July 1998)

1.
According to Article 7 (3) of Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild
birds, bird species listed in its Annex II/2, which include mergus merganser, can only be hunted in those Member
States in respect of which they are indicated. As this species is not indicated for Germany its hunting there could
only therefore be allowed as a derogation in accordance with the conditions of Article 9 of this Directive.

2.
The Commission is aware of the conservation status of mergus merganser which is considered to be
favourable at the European level. However, this is not the situation in each Member State where it occurs as a
breeding species and according to the published scientific literature it has decreased in Germany. The German
authorities should consider this fact in any measures they take which may affect mergus merganser.

(1999/C 31/186)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2240/98

by Bertel Haarder (ELDR) to the Commission

(16 July 1998)

Subject: Staffing policy in the EU institutions

Do the four categories of EU staff have the same entry grade and step and the same career profile irrespective of
whether they are employed by the Commission, Parliament or other EU institutions?

What percentage of staff at the Commission information offices in the European capitals are officials, temporary
staff and local staff?

What is the entry grade of heads of information offices and how long on average do they occupy their posts?
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2083/98 by Alexandros ALAVANOS to the Commission. Fatal accidents in Greece
Date: 1998-07-10
Institutions: ALAVANOS, European Parliament
Subjects: Eurostat, Greece, road transport, statistics, transport accident, transport policy

C 118/22

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

29.4.1999

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(23 September 1998)

The Commission would ask the Honourable Member to refer to the answer given to Written Question
E-2510/97 by Mr Rauti (1).

It would note that, on its reading of the judgment referred to by the Honourable Member, the
Constitutional Court refused to rule that constitutional rights had been infringed. The Court had simply
referred to the right of the Italian legislature to modify the unsatisfactory tax treatment of single-income
families. In any event, the Commission would have no jurisdiction to make representations to the Italian
authorities if the Italian constitution were infringed.

(1) OJ C 117, 16.4.1998.

(1999/C 118/026)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2083/98

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

Subject: Fatal accidents in Greece

(10 July 1998)

According to Eurostat No 1298 of 2 June 1998, the figures for road accidents in Greece are the most
disturbing in the Union in that it is the only Member State in which fatal road accidents increased between
1989 and 1995, by 29 %, whereas in most countries the number fell.

What, in the Commission(cid:146)s view, are the main reasons for these alarming figures? What measures will it
take in cooperation with the Greek Government to deal with this situation?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(16 September 1998)

As indicated by the Honourable Member, Greece is the only Member State where an increase in the
number of road accidents has occured in recent years.

The Commission considers that the prime responsibility for analysing and identifying the possible causes
for such negative trends is with national authorities. However, the Commission provides tools and
statistics to the individual Member States (e.g. the CARE database) in order to enable them to compare
national situations. When making such comparisons, specific national circumstances should clearly be
kept in mind, particularly those relating to risk exposure where parameters such as numbers of vehicles,
demographic patterns, infrastructure can have a quite significant influence.

The Commission continues to be ready to discuss the relevant issues with national authorities whenever
Member State administrations consider that such an approach could have productive effects in increasing
safety.

(1999/C 118/027)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2087/98

by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(10 July 1998)

Subject: Harmful effects of CS gas

Following the increasing concerns about the harmful effects of CS gas, will the Commission undertake a
study into the risks to human health of orthochlorobenzylidene malononitrile?
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2171/98 by Hiltrud BREYER to the Council. Castor shipments in breach of EU law
Date: 1998-07-10
Institutions: BREYER, European Parliament
Subjects: EC Directive, application of EU law, health risk, ionising radiation, nuclear safety, occupational safety, public health, radiation protection, radioactive waste, transport of dangerous goods

C 96/50

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

8.4.1999

2. Can views stated by the Commission in proceedings currently under way (Case C388/95) on the same subject
be considered as an element of substantive law although the Court of Justice has not given a ruling on them?

3.

Is the Commission aware that its current position is contributing largely to accentuating the north-south
divide in the Union, in particular as regards budgetary problems in the farming sector, and this immediately
prior to the reform of the COM in the wine sector?

(1) OJ C 31, 5.2.1999, p. 65.
(2) OJ L 84, 27.3.1987, p. 59.
(3) OJ C 108, 7.4.1998, p. 138.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(27 July 1998)

1.
The Commission considers, that in certain cases, the national provisions making compulsory bottling of the
wines of quality produced in a given region (quality wine psr) in region of production conform with milking EC
and it is precisely this position which it defends before the Court of Justice.

The position of the Commission in a current contentious procedure is not obviously an element of positive

2.
duty. It is only the interpretation of the Commission of the positive duty in force.

3.

The Commission considers that there is not North-South cleavage in this matter.

(1999/C 96/071)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2171/98

by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Council

(10 July 1998)

Subject: Castor shipments in breach of EU law

Can the Council say what action it will take following the violation by Member States of EU legislation on
radiation protection, namely Council Directives 92/3/Euratom (1) of 3 February 1992 and 96/29/Euratom (2) of
13 May 1996, in the case of the Castor shipments?

(1) OJ L 35, 12.2.1992, p. 24.
(2) OJ L 159, 29.6.1996, p. 1.

Reply

(19 October 1998)

Article 21 of Council Directive 92/3/Euratom on the supervision and control of shipments of radioactive waste
between Member States and into and out of the Community (1) and Article 55 of Council Directive 96/29/
Euratom laying down basic safety standards for the protection of the health of workers and the general public
against the dangers arising from ionising radiation (2) stipulate that Member States are forthwith to inform the
Commission of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions which they have adopted to comply with
those Directives.

It is therefore for the Commission to ensure that Member States comply with the provisions laid down in those
Directives.

(1) OJ L 35, 12.2.1992, p. 24.
(2) OJ L 159, 29.6.1996, p. 1.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2134/98 by Philippe DE COENE , Anne VAN LANCKER to the Commission. Length of the ECVAM Director's term of office
Date: 1998-07-10
Institutions: DE COENE, European Parliament, VAN LANCKER
Subjects: Community body, Joint Research Centre, advisory committee (EU), animal experimentation, appointment of staff, contract

14.5.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 135/9

(1999/C 135/011)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2079/98

by Magda Aelvoet (V) to the Commission

(7 July 1998)

Subject: European Centre for the Validation of Alternatives

We have heard that there are problems regarding the continuity of the work of the European Centre for the
Validation of Alternatives, which develops alternatives to tests on animals. We are convinced that the
ECVAM carries out valuable work.

Is it true that the Director of the ECVAM, Mr Balls, was appointed for only two years rather than the

1.
customary five?

2.

Is this situation jeopardizing the survival and efficient operation of the Centre?

Does the Commission agree that the ECVAM has done important work and must be able to continue

3.
it?

(1999/C 135/012)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2134/98

by Philippe De Coene (PSE) and Anne Van Lancker (PSE) to the Commission

Subject: Length of the ECVAM Director’s term of office

(10 July 1998)

The term of office of the Director of the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods
(ECVAM) has recently been renewed. The usual term is five years, but this time an extension of only two
years has been granted.

Limiting the term of office in this way will seriously jeopardize any research that is launched during the
period concerned. Many research projects can obviously not be completed in such a time, and two years is
also too short to draw any well-founded long-term conclusions.

Scientific centres will not attach much credibility to the ECVAM when they realize that the Director has
barely two years to carry out his research.

Does the Commission not agree that it makes scientific sense to grant a full term of five years? What are
the reasons for choosing a shorter term?

(1999/C 135/013)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2452/98

by Paul Lannoye (V) to the Commission

(30 July 1998)

Subject: ECVAM

The appointment of Mr Balls, the director of ECVAM (the European Centre for the Validation of
Alternative Methods), a body set up by the EU, has been extended by two years.

Since the director is normally appointed for a period of five years, the associations working for the
protection of laboratory animals are concerned for the future of the institution.

As ECVAM is one of the rare organisations bringing together experts in the validation of alternative
methods, it would be regrettable if its existence were to be placed in jeopardy.

Can the Commission tell me what the future prospects of ECVAM are?
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2110/98 by Mair MORGAN to the Commission. Personal watercraft (jet skis etc.)
Date: 1998-07-10
Institutions: European Parliament, MORGAN
Subjects: consumer goods, consumer protection, environmental protection, leisure, maritime safety, motor vehicle, pleasure craft, product safety, vessel













EUR-Lex - 91998E2110 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91998E2110

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2110/98 by Mair MORGAN to the Commission. Personal watercraft (jet skis etc.)  


Official Journal C 118 , 29/04/1999 P. 0029 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2110/98by Mair Morgan (PSE) to the Commission(10 July 1998)Subject: Personal watercraft (jet skis etc.)Can the Commission comment on the issue of personal watercraft (jet skis etc.) which is becoming more contentious in the European Community where recent proposals for general legislation to control this potentially hazardous activity have not proceeded and maritime authorities are now limited to by-law provision which tends to be relatively narrow? A recent court ruling that "vessel" does not include personal watercraft has exacerbated the difficulties.Does the Commission acknowledge the need for general legislation for public safety concerning these watercraft?Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission(3 September 1998)The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to written question E-2524/95 by Ms Plooij van Gorsel(1).The Commission continues to focus its efforts relating to maritime safety and environment protection on merchant shipping, but nevertheless is examining the possibility of addressing the safe operation of pleasure craft in the coming years.Insofar as product safety is concerned, and in the absence of specific Community provisions relating to personal watercraft, Directive 92/59/EEC on general product safety(2) applies - this requires that only safe products be placed on the market. Under this Directive Member States are required to monitor the compliance of products with this obligation and to adopt the necessary measures against those representing a danger for the health and safety of consumers, including product withdrawal where necessary.(1) OJ C 40, 12.2.1996.(2) OJ L 228, 11.8.1992.