do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2179/98 by Marie-Noëlle LIENEMANN to the Commission. Access to beaches for persons of restricted mobility
Date: 1998-07-10
Institutions: European Parliament, LIENEMANN
Subjects: EU programme, bathing water, disabled person, elderly person, tourist infrastructure

C 50/132

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

22.2.1999

(1999/C 50/190)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2179/98

by Marie-Noºlle Lienemann (PSE) to the Commission

Subject: Access to beaches for persons of restricted mobility

(10 July 1998)

The beach is a unique and universal meeting-place which breaks down all barriers because it brings together
persons of all ages, social categories, nationalities and races. At present only persons of restricted mobility are
excluded from it.

What does the Commission propose to do to remedy this unfair situation?

Should not the Commission be considering the possibility of creating a (cid:145)European label(cid:146) to promote accessibility
to beaches for persons of restricted mobility (the elderly, the physically handicapped etc.)?

(1999/C 50/191)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2230/98

by FrØdØric Striby (I-EDN) to the Commission

(16 July 1998)

Subject: Introduction of a European label to facilitate access to beaches by people with restricted mobility

In 1995 the Commission recognised, in connection with the Helios II programme, the valuable experience gained
from the arrangements introduced in Hendaye, in France, to make the beach more accessible for persons with
restricted mobility. The introduction of a European label indicating that a beach was accessible to such persons
could be linked to the existing directives on the quality of bathing water (the blue flag system). Could the
Commission consider this idea put forward by the (cid:145)Handiplage(cid:146) association in Jaxtou, France, to improve
awareness at European level?

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-2179/98 and E-2230/98
given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(5 August 1998)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Members to its answer to Written Question P-2136/98 by
Mrs Elmalan (1).

(1) See page 130.

(1999/C 50/192)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2187/98

by Jean-Antoine Giansily (UPE) to the Commission

(7 July 1998)

Subject: Presidential elections in Togo

Presidential elections were held in Togo on Sunday, 21 June 1998.

According to press reports, DG VIII allocated almost ECU 2 million to those elections.

Would the Commission provide a break-down of those funds and a list of the organizations that received more
than ECU 100 000 in relation to each action?

What criteria were used for the selection of beneficiaries, and what committee decided on the nature of the
European Union(cid:146)s intervention? Was the European Parliament associated in these decisions, and if so, how?

A group called Reporters Without Frontiers was heavily involved in these elections, in the course of which it
showed a strong tendency to interfere in Togo(cid:146)s internal affairs. This organisation claimed, meanwhile, to be
acting at the behest of the European Union.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2105/98 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Toxic cloud
Date: 1998-07-10
Institutions: AMADEO, European Parliament
Subjects: Spain, health risk, ionising radiation, nuclear accident, nuclear safety, occupational health, public health, radiation protection, radioactive pollution, stratospheric pollution













EUR-Lex - 91998E2105 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91998E2105

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2105/98 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Toxic cloud  


Official Journal C 118 , 29/04/1999 P. 0028 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2105/98by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission(10 July 1998)Subject: Toxic cloudThe radioactive cloud which crossed half of Europe, including northern Italy, from 25 May to 2 June 1998 originated in Spain, but this was completely unknown until Spain finally admitted that there had been a leak of radioactivity from the Acerinox foundry at Algeciras near Cadiz.The source of the contamination was apparently a quantity of caesium 137 in the metal scrap that fuelled the furnace. An international committee of inquiry has been set up. By all accounts the level of caesium in the air was 2000 times higher than normal. Some experts claim there was no danger either to the population or to the environment.If it is likely that there was no serious risk, can the Commission guarantee that there will not be any long-term risk? During the time the atmosphere was contaminated, the quantity of caesium deposited on fruit and vegetables was 2000 times higher than normal.Does the Commission consider that, despite that, there is no danger to consumers?Given the seriousness of the problem, how is it conceivable that the incident did not come to light until two weeks after it occurred?Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission(15 September 1998)In Spain and the other Member States, the dose received by inhaling polluted air for one week would be in the order of 10 millionths of the maximum permissible dose for members of the public as laid down in the basic safety standards of 13 May 1996 (Council Directive 96/29/Euratom of 13 May 1996 laying down basic safety standards for the protection of the health of workers and the general public against the dangers arising from ionising radiation)(1). The measurements currently available show no contamination of fruit or vegetables, and no significant contamination is to be expected on the basis of the measured levels of air contamination.According to the report presented by the Nuclear Safety Council to the Spanish Parliament, most of the delay in passing on the information was due to the fact that the factory did not notify it (for about a week) until it had verified that the incident had occurred and ascertained how serious it was. The Spanish authorities then inspected the plant and assessed the results before informing the public. The Commission regards this delay as unsatisfactory and considers that the procedures involved should be reviewed.(1) OJ L 159, 29.6.1996.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2085/98 by Alexandros ALAVANOS to the Commission. Statistics on Greece
Date: 1998-07-10
Institutions: ALAVANOS, European Parliament
Subjects: European accounting system, Greece, private investment, public investment, statistics

C 182/2

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

28.6.1999

from the Fund. The results of the study point to a strong positive relationship between infrastructure and
private investment, to significant long-term employment effects and to important spillovers between the
regions of the cohesion countries and their neighbours. The regional
income and employment effects
estimated by the models presented by the LSE exceed those anticipated by traditional cost-benefit methods.

The annual reports on the Cohesion fund include extensive comment on the evaluation process. A
comprehensive publication on the LSE study is in preparation.

(1) COM(96) 542 final.

(1999/C 182/002)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2085/98

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(10 July 1998)

Subject: Statistics on Greece

Under the title of ‘Weekly Europe Selected Statistics No 1055’, ‘Europe’ of 18 May 1998 republished from
Eurostat Statistics in Focus, Economy and Finance 12/98 data on public and private investment in the Member
States of the EU. The figures, however, do not include data on Greece.

1. Why does data on Greece not appear?

2.
If the lack of data is due to their not being provided by the Member State, what measures is the
Commission taking to address the problem so that it is possible to produce statistics for all the Member States
of the EU?

Answer by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission

(15 September 1998)

The publication to which ‘Europe’ referred on 18 May 1998 was issue No 1998/12 of the series entitled
‘Statistics in Focus 7 Economy and Finance’, which dealt with government and private sector investment in the
European Union 1980-96. The issue provided an abridged version of some of the data appearing in the
publication entitled ‘National Accounts ESA: Detailed Tables by Sector 7 Non-Financial Transactions.’

The publication at European level of reliable and comparable data on gross fixed capital formation broken
down by sector of investment depends on the availability of a consistent and exhaustive set of detailed
statistical information. Until now, the Member States have always transmitted data on the non-financial
transactions of the institutional sectors, especially general government bodies, on a voluntary basis. In the
absence of particular data for Greece, it was not possible to include this Member State in the issue of ‘Statistics
in Focus’ to which the Honourable Member referred.

There should be a significant improvement in the situation in the coming years, after the application from
1 January 1999 of Council Regulation (EC) 2223/96 of 25 June 1996 on the European system of national and
regional accounts in the Community (1), which requires the Member States to provide each year a set of
sectoral data from the national accounts.

(1) OJ L 310, 31.11.1996.