WRITTEN QUESTION No. 275/96 by Florus WIJSENBEEK to the Commission. Admission to the transit convention as of 1 July 1996
Date: 1996-02-15
Institutions: European Parliament, WIJSENBEEK
Subjects: Hungary, Poland, customs transit, fraud













EUR-Lex - 91996E0275 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E0275

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 275/96 by Florus WIJSENBEEK to the Commission. Admission to the transit convention as of 1 July 1996  


Official Journal C 185 , 25/06/1996 P. 0047 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0275/96 by Florus Wijsenbeek (ELDR) to the Commission (15 February 1996)Subject: Admission to the transit convention as of 1 July 1996Is the admission of Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic and Slovakia to the European transit conference as of 1 July 1996 not utterly incomprehensible at such an early time? Can the Commission not argue that a postponement of one to two years would be much better in terms of the adjustments that need to be made to the different arrangements in the different countries in order to prevent fraud?Can the Commission state specifically why it considers the instruments of the existing PHARE programmes adequate to preventing communication problems at policy and operational level from arising from the enlargement - something branch organizations and organizations with practical experience of the situation say is impossible?Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (12 April 1996)In answer to the Honourable Member's first question, I would point out that the principle of extending the transit arrangements is enshrined in a specific article of the Europe Agreements which entered into force with Poland and Hungary on 1 February 1994 and with the Czech Republic and Slovakia on 1 February 1995, and that the accession of Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic and Slovakia to the customs conventions on common transit and the simplification of formalities in trade in goods is the culmination of a lengthy process that began when they first requested accession on 29 August 1991.The invitations to accede to the conventions formulated by the Joint Committees on 26 October 1995 came in the wake of an assistance programme, which was followed that October by an evaluation mission to the countries concerned.In view of their state of preparedness, there was no valid reason to put back the extension of the common transit arrangements from 1 July 1996.The Commission has, moreover, shown, in its communications of March 1995 and February 1996, its awareness of the problems of transit fraud, taking or planning a whole series of measures to make the transit arrangements less vulnerable to fraud.In answer to the second question, a multicountry Phare customs cooperation programme covering the four countries wishing to accede to the convention on common transit has, since late 1991, provided a framework for technical assistance and training in the field of customs. More specifically, a team of highly-qualified international experts has been helping the four countries prepare for the extension of the convention. The result of the efforts of the past few years is that the customs administrations in question have enjoyed support in preparation for the extension of common transit. Within the same framework there are plans to provide a second support team once common transit is actually extended, the aim being to help the countries concerned resolve any pressing problems that might arise on entry into force.What is more, given the scale and importance of the extension of the transit arrangements, the Commission, at the request of the countries concerned and after seeking the views of the Member States' transit specialists, last year decided to continue support through the Phare multicountry transit facilitation and customs modernization programme.This five-year programme has a budget of ECU 91 million for funding infrastructure, training and technical assistance in the associated countries.