do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2225/98 by Kirsi PIHA to the Commission. Situation in Tibet; EU policy on Tibet
Date: 1998-07-16
Institutions: European Parliament, PIHA
Subjects: China, Finland, Tibetan question, human rights, official visit, protection of minorities, the EU's international role

C 13/154

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.1.1999

(1999/C 13/219)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2205/98

by Kirsten Jensen (PSE) to the Commission

(10 July 1998)

Subject: Cooperation with the Mafia in Uzbekistan

According to a series of articles in Potitiken of 18 and 19 March 1998 Carlsberg, the large Danish brewery,
1.
is cooperating with Gafur Rakhimov, an Uzbek who is involved in the drugs trade and has close connections with
the Mafia in Uzbekistan. Gafur Rakhimov is allegedly blacklisted in all Schengen countries and therefore
prevented from obtaining a visa in the EU. Does the Commission consider it to be a problem that European
companies are cooperating in this way with people blacklisted under the Schengen agreement?

2.
There are reports that the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development is participating as an
investor in the project and therefore also cooperating with Gafur Rakhimov. Can the Commission confirm this?

3.

Is there any possibility of the Community intervening in this and similar cases?

Is the Commission considering taking the initiative to intervene either in this specific case or in similar

4.
cases?

5. Will the entry into force of the Amsterdam Treaty in any way change the answer to these questions?

Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission

(23 July 1998)

The Commission would point out that this question is exactly the same as the Honourable Member(cid:146)s Written
Question E-1075/98.

The Commission would therefore refer the Honourable Member to the answer it has already given to that
question (1).

(1) OJ C 386, 11.12.1998, p. 78.

(1999/C 13/220)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2225/98

by Kirsi Piha (PPE) to the Commission

(16 July 1998)

Subject: Situation in Tibet; EU policy on Tibet

Tibet(cid:146)s political and spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama, visited Finland on 19 June, eliciting assessments as to what
the EU might be able and willing to do to adopt a common policy on Tibet. This would be desirable, as it would
make it possible to intervene effectively in the human rights situation in Tibet and for the EU, in common with
others, to exert pressure on the negotiations between China and Tibet.

Does the Commission have any plans for adopting a common EU policy on Tibet, and if so, what would its broad
outlines be?

Answer given by Sir Leon Brittan on behalf of the Commission

(4 August 1998)

The Commission recalls that Tibet has regularly been addressed in the framework of both the EU-China political
dialogue and the specific bilateral EU-China dialogue on human rights. There was a visit to Tibet 1-10 May 1998
by the troika heads of mission in Beijing.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1529/98 of 16 July 1998 concerning tenders notified in response to the invitation to tender for the import of maize issued in Regulation (EC) No 1445/98
Date: 1998-07-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: CCT duties, award of contract, import, import licence, maize, tariff reduction

17. 7. 98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 201/61

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1529/98

of 16 July 1998

concerning tenders notified in response to the invitation to tender for the import
of maize issued in Regulation (EC) No 1445/98

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92
of 30 June 1992 on the common organisation of the
market in cereals (1), as last amended by Commission
Regulation (EC) No 923/96 (2), and in particular Article
12(1) thereof,

Whereas an invitation to tender for the maximum reduc-
tion in the duty on maize imported into Spain was
opened pursuant
to Commission Regulation (EC) No
1445/98 (3);

Whereas Article 5 of Commission Regulation (EC) No
1839/95 (4), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1963/
95 (5), allows the Commission to decide, in accordance
with the procedure laid down in Article 23 of Regulation
(EEC) No 1766/92 and on the basis of the tenders noti-
fied, to make no award;

Whereas on the basis of the criteria laid down in Articles
6 and 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1839/95 a maximum
reduction in the duty should not be fixed;

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

No action shall be taken on the tenders notified from 10
to 16 July 1998 in response to the invitation to tender for
the reduction in the duty on maize issued in Regulation
(EC) No 1445/98.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 17 July 1998.

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

Done at Brussels, 16 July 1998.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 181, 1. 7. 1992, p. 21.
(2) OJ L 126, 24. 5. 1996, p. 37.
(3) OJ L 191, 7. 7. 1998, p. 47.
(4) OJ L 177, 28. 7. 1995, p. 4.
(5) OJ L 189, 10. 8. 1995, p. 22.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1542/98 of 16 July 1998 concerning the stopping of fishing for common sole by vessels flying the flag of Belgium
Date: 1998-07-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Belgium, authorised catch, catch quota, fishing area, sea fish, ship's flag

18. 7. 98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 202/15

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1542/98

of 16 July 1998

concerning the stopping of fishing for common sole by vessels flying the flag of
Belgium

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93
of 12 October 1993 establishing a control system applic-
able to the common fisheries policy (1), as last amended
by Regulation (EC) No 2635/97 (2), and in particular
Article 21(3) thereof,

Whereas Council Regulation (EC) No 45/98 of 19
December 1997 fixing, for certain fish stocks and groups
of fish stocks, the total allowable catches for 1998 and
certain conditions under which they may be fished (3), as
last amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 783/98 (4),
provides for common sole quotas for 1998;

Whereas, in order to ensure compliance with the provi-
sions relating to the quantitative limitations on catches of
stocks subject to quotas, it is necessary for the Commis-
sion to fix the date by which catches made by vessels
flying the flag of a Member State are deemed to have
exhausted the quota allocated;

Whereas, according to the information communicated to
the Commission, catches of common sole in the waters of
ICES division VIII a, b by vessels flying the flag of
Belgium or registered in Belgium have reached the quota

allocated for 1998; whereas Belgium has prohibited
fishing for this stock as from 5 July 1998; whereas it is
therefore necessary to abide by that date,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Catches of common sole in the waters of ICES division
VIII a, b by vessels flying the flag of Belgium or registered
in Belgium are deemed to have exhausted the quota allo-
cated to Belgium for 1998.

Fishing for common sole in the waters of ICES division
VIII a, b by vessels flying the flag of Belgium or registered
in Belgium is prohibited, as well as the retention on
board, the transhipment and the landing of such stock
captured by the abovementioned vessels after the date of
application of this Regulation.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter
into force on the day
following its publication in the Official Journal of the
European Communities.

It shall apply with effect from 5 July 1998.

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

Done at Brussels, 16 July 1998.

For the Commission

Emma BONINO

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 261, 20. 10. 1993, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 356, 31. 12. 1997, p. 14.
(3) OJ L 12, 19. 1. 1998, p. 1.
(4) OJ L 113, 15. 4. 1998, p. 8.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2245/98 by Allan MACARTNEY to the Commission. Horse medication and welfare
Date: 1998-07-16
Institutions: European Parliament, MACARTNEY
Subjects: animal welfare, equidae, foodstuffs legislation, horsemeat, leisure, sport, veterinary drug, veterinary legislation, veterinary medicinal product, waste

C 31/136

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

5.2.1999

(1999/C 31/188)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2245/98

by Allan Macartney (ARE) to the Commission

(16 July 1998)

Subject: Horse medication and welfare

Is the Commission aware that under legislation banning the use of certain medicines widely used to treat horses
which comes into effect in January 2000, horses used solely for sports and leisure purposes will be subject to
exactly the same regulations as horses bred for food purposes?

Has the Commission considered that no alternative medicine is available for certain afflictions common in horses
used for sport and leisure and that the implementation of the new legislation could pose a significant threat to the
welfare of these animals?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(25 August 1998)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to written question no E-1495/98 by
Mr Kindermann (1).

(1) See page 42.

(1999/C 31/189)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2273/98

by Richard Corbett (PSE) to the Commission

(22 July 1998)

Subject: (cid:146)Presidency of the Union(cid:146)

The publication (cid:145)The Week in Europe(cid:146) of the European Commission(cid:146)s London office on 25 June refers to Austria
taking over (cid:145)the EU Presidency(cid:146).

Could the Commission explain what this new position is? Since when does the EU have a President? Which
article of the Treaty provides for this? What happened to the old system whereby each Institution had its own
President (Presidency of the Council, President of the Commission, President of Parliament etc.)?

Or is this just an indication that the Commission services know as little as the press about the structure of the
European Union and attribute to the Presidency of the Council a wider responsibility, which it does not have?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(14 September 1998)

The week in Europe is intended to be an informal publication, setting out in brief fashion some of the more
notable events in the Community over the past week. In this context shorthand versions of terms and titles are
often used, not least because readers are familiar with them.

in Britain the government referred to the
Member State governments themselves use similar terms:
(cid:145)UK Presidency of the European Union(cid:146) in many documents. During the Austrian Presidency, the official media
handbook produced by the Federal Chancellery and Federal ministry for Foreign Affairs refers to the (cid:145)Austrian
EU Presidency(cid:146) on the front cover.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2224/98 by Kirsi PIHA to the Council. Situation in Tibet; EU policy on Tibet
Date: 1998-07-16
Institutions: European Parliament, PIHA
Subjects: China, European Union, Tibetan question, Troika (EU), cooperation policy, ethnic group, human rights, report

8.4.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 96/59

national and European levels and its impact on employment duly evaluated(cid:146), and to encouraging the social
partners to (cid:145)reinforce, implement and evaluate the impact of their contributions (on the employment strategy)(cid:146). In
particular, the social partners at national and European levels play a very important role in ensuring the success of
this strategy in terms of the (cid:145)modernisation of the contractual and institutional framework for reconciling
flexibility and security, establishment of systems for lifelong learning and the promotion of new forms of work
organisation and employment patterns such as job rotation systems(cid:146).

The Commission hopes that these recommendations on the contribution of the social players to the employment
strategy will be increasingly followed up by each Member State, depending on its circumstances, in the drawing
up, implementation and evaluation of the employment guidelines.

(1) COM(98) 316 final.

(1999/C 96/084)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2224/98

by Kirsi Piha (PPE) to the Council

(16 July 1998)

Subject: Situation in Tibet; EU policy on Tibet

Tibet(cid:146)s political and spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama, visited Finland on 19 June, eliciting assessments as to what
the EU might be able and willing to do to adopt a common policy on Tibet. This would be desirable, as it would
make it possible to intervene effectively in the human rights situation in Tibet and for the EU, in common with
others, to exert pressure on the negotiations between China and Tibet.

Does the Council have any plans for adopting a common EU policy on Tibet, and if so, what would its broad
outlines be?

Reply

(22 October 1998)

As the Honourable Member is aware of, a mission to Tibet by the EU Troika Ambassadors to Peking took place
between 1 and 10 May 1998. The report from the mission was published on 19 June.

At present, the Council is considering what steps to take as a result of the mission.

It will continue to make known to China its concerns relating to ethnic minorities, including in Tibet, within the
bilateral dialogue on human rights.

(1999/C 96/085)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2228/98

by Kirsi Piha (PPE) to the Commission

(16 July 1998)

Subject: Freezing of budget appropriations for grants

The Court of Justice of the European Communities has frozen the Commission(cid:146)s social aid funds on the grounds
that there is no legal basis for them, because the aid programmes concerned were not endorsed by the Council.
Yet these programmes are significant from the point of view of a people(cid:146)s Europe.

How many projects, and which ones, will now be deprived of assistance, and for which will it be possible to
secure the Council(cid:146)s endorsement?
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2209/98 by Christoph KONRAD to the Commission. Infringement of European law by the Federal Republic of Germany, in particular through Article 60 of the Strassenverkehrszulassungsordnung (StVZO)
Date: 1998-07-16
Institutions: European Parliament, KONRAD
Subjects: EC Directive, Germany, advertising, application of EU law, approximation of laws, motor car, technical standard, vehicle registration













EUR-Lex - 91998E2209 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91998E2209

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2209/98 by Christoph KONRAD to the Commission. Infringement of European law by the Federal Republic of Germany, in particular through Article 60 of the Strassenverkehrszulassungsordnung (StVZO)  


Official Journal C 135 , 14/05/1999 P. 0030 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2209/98by Christoph Konrad (PPE) to the Commission(16 July 1998)Subject: Infringement of European law by the Federal Republic of Germany, in particular through Article 60 of the Strassenverkehrszulassungsordnung (StVZO)1. Does Article 60, paragraph 7 of the Strassenverkehrszulassungsordnung (StVZO) (Regulation on the entry into service of motor vehicles) infringe the legal provisions of the European Union on the type and composition of registration numbers and their supports?Article 60, paragraph 7 prohibits the attachment to the supports of registration numbers of any type of device which could give rise to confusion with official registration numbers or which could impair the effect of these numbers.2. If not, is the Commission planning a harmonization of the provisions on the supports for registration numbers in the foreseeable future?3. Will the Commission also create the possibility of making use of additional advertising space on the supports, for which there is at present no legal provision in the Federal Republic of Germany? A certain amount of scope could create some 2 500 jobs in Germany.4. What format might this specific provision on the advertising space have?Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission(1 October 1998)The Commission considers that Article 60, paragraph 7, of the German StVZO does not conflict with the type approval requirements for the place and format of registration plates as laid down in Council Directive 70/222/EEC of 20 March 1970 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the space for mounting and the fixing of rear registration plates on motor vehicles and their trailers(1).The Commission does not intend to propose a change of the type approval legislation on this matter.(1) OJ L 76, 6.4.1970.
Resolution on the deliberations of the Committee on Petitions during the parliamentary year 1997-1998
Date: 1998-07-16
Institutions: Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, European Parliament
Subjects: EP Committee, activity report, petition













EUR-Lex - 51998AP0250 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



51998AP0250

Resolution on the deliberations of the Committee on Petitions during the parliamentary year 1997-1998  


Official Journal C 250 , 18/05/1998 P. 0107 





Recommendation by the Council concerning the Member States fulfilling the necessary conditions for the adoption of a single currency (Article 109j(2) and (4) EC) (7884/1/98 REV1 - C4-0250/98 - 98/0812(CNS))The European Parliament,- having regard to the recommendation by the Council, meeting in the composition of the Ministers of Economic Affairs and Finance, concerning the Member States fulfilling the necessary conditions for the adoption of a single currency (Article 109j(2) and (4) EC) (C4-0250/98) ((OJ L 139, 11.5.1998, p. 21.)),- having been consulted by the Council pursuant to Article 109j(2) and (4) of the EC Treaty,- having regard to Rule 79a of its Rules of Procedure,- having regard to the proposal, submitted orally, of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and Industrial Policy,1. Approves the Council recommendation;2. Instructs its President to forward this opinion to the Council, meeting in the composition of the Heads of State or Government, and the Commission.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2215/98 by David THOMAS to the Commission. Payments for intervention storage
Date: 1998-07-16
Institutions: European Parliament, THOMAS
Subjects: EU aid, cereals, intervention stock, restriction on competition, storage cost, storage premium













EUR-Lex - 91998E2215 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91998E2215

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2215/98 by David THOMAS to the Commission. Payments for intervention storage  


Official Journal C 135 , 14/05/1999 P. 0033 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2215/98by David Thomas (PSE) to the Commission(16 July 1998)Subject: Payments for intervention storageWhat level of payments are made by the Commission to Member States for in situ intervention storage of cereals? In addition, what additional payments are made for handling cereals entering and leaving intervention stores?What correlation is there between payments made in Member States and the rates set by the EU? Can the Commission publish the rates of payment made in Member States?Does the Commission consider that different payments rates for storage across the EU distort competition?Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission(8 September 1998)The intervention storage costs of cereals are reimbursed to the Member States on the basis of standard amounts fixed from time to time by Commission decision. The standard amounts applicable for the 1998 financial year are ECU 1,76 per ton entry costs(1), ECU 1,71 per ton removal costs with tolerance(2) (ECU 1,98 per ton without tolerance) and ECU 1,11 per ton per month storage costs.The method of calculation of these standard amounts, which are applied across the Community, is laid down in Commission Regulation (EEC) 1643/89 of 12 June 1989 defining the standard amounts to be used for financing material operations arising from the public storage of agricultural products(3) and is based on the weighted average of the real costs communicated by the four least expensive Member States, provided that those Member States hold at least 33 % of the quantities of the product in question. The Commission does not have a policy of publishing the real rates communicated to it for the purpose of this calculation.Since the Commission pays a uniform rate throughout the Community, the suggestion that different payment rates for storage across the Community distort competition is not relevant. Although the real rates applicable from one Member State to another may vary, this is a reflection of the market conditions in each Member State.(1) If no physical movement of product takes place, the standard amount is reduced by ECU 0,72 per ton.(2) Article 4 of Commission Regulation (EEC) 3597/90 of 12 December 1990 on the accounting rules for intervention measures involving the buying-in, storage and sale of agricultural products by intervention agencies, OJ L 350, 14.12.1990.(3) OJ L 162, 13.6.1989.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2210/98 by Klaus-Heiner LEHNE to the Commission. Use of support funds in Italy
Date: 1998-07-16
Institutions: European Parliament, LEHNE
Subjects: EU aid, EU programme, European Regional Development Fund, Umbria, improvement of housing, rural development, rural habitat, rural tourism













EUR-Lex - 91998E2210 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91998E2210

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2210/98 by Klaus-Heiner LEHNE to the Commission. Use of support funds in Italy  


Official Journal C 135 , 14/05/1999 P. 0031 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2210/98by Klaus-Heiner Lehne (PPE) to the Commission(16 July 1998)Subject: Use of support funds in ItalyIs it correct that in 1991, 1992 and 1993 European support funds were granted for the renovation of old farmhouses with the aim of creating holiday homes near to Umbertide in Umbria, Italy?If so, is it correct that these European support funds for the renovation of the farmhouses or holiday homes amounted to about ITL 6 billion?If so, is it correct that these houses were never rented and are now in exactly the same condition as before?Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission(28 September 1998)The operational programme of the region of Umbria for the development of rural areas under Objective 5(b) for the period 1991-93 provides for, inter alia, the part-financing of investments aimed at renovating, for tourist purposes, buildings of particular cultural value which have deteriorated owing to their non-utilisation.The implementation of the programme is the responsibility of the region of Umbria. According to the information provided by the region three projects of the above-mentioned type were part-financed in the commune of Umbertide under the Objective 5(b) programme during the period 1991-93 for a total public contribution of 379 million lire, 50 % of which was from the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF).The regional authority carried out, for the three projects, an on-the-spot check of the completion of the work and its correctness. The granting of aid was strictly conditional on the building being used for tourist activity for 10 years, under pain of financing being withdrawn. Within the framework of partnership, the Commission will invite the region of Umbria to check compliance with this condition.