WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2855/97 by Ria OOMEN-RUIJTEN , Raphaël CHANTERIE to the Commission. Homeopathic medicinal products
C 102/138 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 3. 4. 98 The budget for this action has in fact increased slightly in overall terms compared with the previous year. However, in the past the grants were disbursed via the coordinating university of each cooperation activity, which then had the responsibility of distributing them to the various partners. Consequently, only 300 coordi- nating establishments received Community aid which was destined for all the partner establishments. In 1997, for the first time, each of the over 1,500 universities participating in Erasmus is receiving an overall grant to contribute towards funding the whole range of its Erasmus activities. This has rendered the Community support much more visible for each institution. The institutional approach highlights the responsibility of each partner university to contribute to the success of the cooperation activities, using the grant it receives from Socrates-Erasmus to complement its own resources and other sources of funding. Nevertheless, the average grant of ECU 17 000 is indeed modest, and the total budget available represents only some 10% of the amount requested. The Commission is aware of the inadequacy of funding for the Socrates programme as whole, for which it had proposed a budget in excess of the figure finally adopted. In accordance with the procedures agreed upon at that time, the Commission has proposed an increase of MECU 50 to the financial framework for the programme in 1998 and 1999. This sum is considered by the Commission to be the minimum necessary to restore the programme’s capacity to meet its stated objectives. In a more favourable budgetary climate, the Commission would have had no hesitation in proposing a higher figure, in line with its original proposals. The Commission’s proposal to increase the budget is currently under discussion in the Parliament and Council. The Parliament has proposed at first reading an increase of MECU 100 over the two years in question. The Council has reached political agreement on an increase of only MECU 25. (98/C 102/207) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2855/97 by Ria Oomen-Ruijten (PPE) and Raphae¤l Chanterie (PPE) to the Commission (11 September 1997) Subject: Homeopathic medicinal products 1. What is the position regarding evaluation of EC directives 92/73 (1) and 92/74 (2) on the registering of homeopathic medicinal products? 2. Is it true that the aim of these objectives › the harmonization of homeopathic medicinal products in the EU › has not been achieved because of failure to implement them properly or consistently in the Member States? 3. 4. Is an evaluation report available and, if so, will the Commission forward it to Parliament? On the basis of the evaluation will the Commission propose a change in legislation and, if so, when? 5. What are the main points in respect of which legislation might need to be changed? (1) OJ L 297, 13. 10. 1992, p. 8. (2) OJ L 297, 13. 10. 1992, p. 12. Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (29 September 1997) On 14 July 1997 the Commission forwarded to the Parliament and Council its report on the application of Directives 92/73/EEC and 92/74/EEC on homeopathic medicinal products (1). All questions raised by the Honourable Members are answered in this report which, in its conclusions, also asks the Parliament and Council to express their view on particular problems raised in the report and to consider whether certain amendments to the directives on homeopathic medicinal products should be envisaged. (1) COM(97) 362 final