do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 468/98 by Richard HOWITT to the Commission. Completion of structural fund programmes 1994- 1999
Date: 1998-02-27
Institutions: European Parliament, HOWITT
Subjects: EU Member State, EU programme, EU statistics, Structural Funds

C 310/70

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

9. 10. 98

The  Commission  is  examining  the  responses  of  the  Member  States  to  these  letters.  A  combined  team  of
Community inspectors and officials has also begun a series of visits to all Member States in order to ensure that
the necessary framework is in place to comply with the obligations of the MAGPs. If the Commission is not
convinced that a genuine effort is being made to respect these obligations, it will not hesitate to take the necessary
legal  action  against  the  Member  States  concerned.  In  the  meantime,  Community  assistance  has  already  been
suspended for some Member States until the MAGP III objectives are achieved.

(98/C 310/90)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0468/98

by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission

(27 February 1998)

Subject: Completion of structural fund programmes 1994-1999

What amount and what percentage of Structural Fund payments by objective and by Member State were paid
after the end of the previous programming period on 31 December 1993? Will the Commission produce a similar
table based on current estimates for monies likely to be outstanding on 31 December 1999? What procedures is
the Commission proposing to use to ensure that current programmes are closed efficiently without any undue
delays in final payments or reduction in the quality of the projects?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(7 May 1998)

Because of the length of the answer, which includes a number of tables, the Commission is sending it direct to the
Honourable Member and to Parliament(cid:146)s Secretariat.

(98/C 310/91)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0470/98

by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission

(27 February 1998)

Subject: Article 10

Given the budget appropriations 1994-98, what is the exact percentage of structural fund spending devoted to
date to Article 10 during the current programming period? What amount would be required in the 1999 budget to
ensure that the first one per cent is achieved overall? Is the Commission committed to putting this forward in its
preliminary draft budget for 1999?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(7 April 1998)

Under the current programming period 1994-1999, 450 MECU have been allocated for spending under Article 10
of  the  European  regional  development  fund  (ERDF)  Regulation (1).  This  represents  approximately  0.56%  of
ERDF.  The  sum  representing  1%  would  be  some  800  MECU.  However,  the  Commission  does  not  intend  to
provide for an increase beyond 0.56% through its proposal for the 1999 budget.

(1)  OJ L 193, 31.7.1993.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 483/98 by Richard HOWITT to the Commission. Community Initiatives and the Structural Funds
Date: 1998-02-27
Institutions: European Parliament, HOWITT
Subjects: Community support framework, EU programme, Structural Funds, cross-border cooperation, equal treatment, regional cooperation, rural development, structural policy













EUR-Lex - 91998E0483 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91998E0483

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 483/98 by Richard HOWITT to the Commission. Community Initiatives and the Structural Funds  


Official Journal C 386 , 11/12/1998 P. 0020 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0483/98by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission(27 February 1998)Subject: Community Initiatives and the Structural FundsWhy did the Commission propose an increase in Community Initiatives from 6 per cent to 15 per cent of the Structural Funds in 1993? Given that it now proposes a reduction from 9 per cent to 5 per cent, why has the Commission changed its mind? In what sense was it wrong in 1993?Answer given by Ms Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission(2 April 1998)Being aware of the importance Parliament attached to the Community Initiatives, in its 1993 Structural Fund reform proposals the Commission proposed granting 15 % of available resources to these Initiatives. The Council ultimately agreed on the figure of 9 % for the current programming period.This 9 % was split between thirteen Community Initiatives. The implementation of these Initiatives in the Member States, with relatively small amounts of financing compared with measures carried out under the Community Support Frameworks (CSFs) and Single Programming Documents (SPDs), involved serious management and administration problems and sometimes impaired the effectiveness of the planned measures.Nevertheless, experience of the approaches used in many Community Initiatives currently under way could be put to use and indeed consolidated when they are incorporated in the CSFs or SPDs under the new Objectives 1, 2 and 3.In order to improve the effectiveness, visibility and innovative character of future Community Initiatives, the Commission plans, in its proposal for a regulation on the next programming period for the structural funds(1), to focus solely on three topics of common interest to be allocated 5 % of funding: cross-border, transnational and interregional cooperation; rural development; and human resources, paying special attention to equal opportunities. Despite a relative decrease in the share allocated to the Community Initiatives, the increased Structural Funds budget should facilitate better quality measures.While reducing the number of topics, the Commission is aware that the quality of the method and the approach used by the Community Initiatives must be maintained in order to preserve, and indeed bring out more clearly, the innovative character of these measures and the value added by the Community, and to develop stronger partnerships.(1) COM(98) 131 final.
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 476/98 of 27 February 1998 amending Regulation (EEC) No 1833/92 setting the amounts of aid for the supply of cereals products from the Community to the Azores and Madeira
Date: 1998-02-27
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Azores, EU production, Madeira, aid system, cereals, supply

L 60/42

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

28. 2. 98

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 476/98

of 27 February 1998

amending Regulation (EEC) No 1833/92 setting the amounts of aid for the supply
of cereals products from the Community to the Azores and Madeira

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1600/92
of 15 June 1992 introducing specific measures in respect
of certain agricultural products for the benefit of the
Azores and Madeira (1), as last amended by Regulation
(EC) No 2348/96 (2), and in particular Article 10 thereof,

Whereas the amounts of aid for the supply of cereals
products to the Azores and Madeira has been settled by
Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1833/92 (3), as last
amended by Regulation (EC) No 246/98 (4); whereas, as a
consequence of the changes of the rates and prices for
cereals products in the European part of the Community
and on the world market, the aid for supply to the Azores

and Madeira should be set at the amounts given in the
Annex;

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

The Annex of amended Regulation (EEC) No 1833/92 is
replaced by the Annex to the present Regulation.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 March 1998.

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

Done at Brussels, 27 February 1998.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 173, 27. 6. 1992, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 320, 11. 12. 1996, p. 1.
(3) OJ L 185, 4. 7. 1992, p. 28.
(4) OJ L 25, 31. 1. 1998, p. 13.

28. 2. 98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 60/43

ANNEX

to the Commission Regulation of 27 February 1998 amending Regulation (EEC)
No 1833/92 setting the amounts of aid for the supply of cereals products from the
Community to the Azores and Madeira

Product
(CN code)

(Ecu/tonne)

Amount of aid

Destination

Azores

Madeira

Common wheat

(1001 90 99)

Barley

Maize

(1003 00 90)

(1005 90 00)

Durum wheat

(1001 10 00)

22

34

33

8

22

34

33

8
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 478/98 by Richard HOWITT to the Commission. Quotas for specific actions within structural fund programmes
Date: 1998-02-27
Institutions: European Parliament, HOWITT
Subjects: EU financing, Structural Funds, financing plan, structural policy

19. 11. 98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 354/7

For  travellers  destined  for  the  Canary  Islands,  this  means  that,  by  virtue  of  exportation  duty-free  sales  may
continue  after  30  June  1999.  On  return,  the  traveller  shall  respect  the  restrictions  in  terms  of  travellers(cid:146)
allowances in the same way as any third country traveller entering the Community.

(1)  OJ L 145, 13.6.1977.
(2)  OJ L 76, 23.3.1992.

(98/C 354/09)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0457/98

by Jose· Barros Moura (PSE) to the Commission

(27 February 1998)

Subject: Community funding of hydraulic projects in Spain

In reply to my Written Question P-4150/97 (1) on the above subject, Mrs Wulf-Mathies sent me the Montgomery
Watson report, which contains almost 200 pages plus annexes but which in my opinion provides an inadequate
answer to my question, since there are a number of points which are not covered.

While  thanking  the  Commissioner  for  her  kindness,  I  should  therefore  like  to  put  the  following  specific
questions:

1.  Were  funding  conditions  identical  to  those  applying  to  the  Alqueva  project  laid  down  for  any  of  the

programmes or projects covered by my question?

2. 

If not, what are the reasons for this differentiation?

(1)  OJ C 187, 16.6.1998, p. 131.

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(6 April 1998)

No project in Spain funded by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) is similar or comparable

1.
to the Alqueva project in size or nature. The same is true of projects funded by the Cohesion Fund.

The  conditions  applied  to  the  part-funding  of  the  Alqueva  project  were  due  to  its  particular  size
2.
(a Community  contribution  of  over  ECU  300  million).  This  scale  raised  specific  problems  in  terms  of  the
environment, the water supply and economic development, and made coordinating its monitoring difficult.

(98/C 354/10)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0478/98

by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission

(27 February 1998)

Subject: Quotas for specific actions within structural fund programmes

To  what  extent  does  the  Commission  regard  the  financial  tables  included  in  agreed  Single  Programming
Documents (SPDs) as fixed, and to what extent does it encourage flexibility in Member States by accepting them
as indicative only? In addition, how far in advance does the Commission prepare quotas for overall amounts to be
devoted  to  specific  actions,  which  are  then  implemented  through  SPDs,  and  to  what  extent  does  it  allow
distribution  to  be  agreed  regionally,  only  subsequently  compiling  overall  Europe-wide  totals?  Does  the
Commission plan any shift in the balance of its approach in this respect, with greater or lesser use of Europe-wide
quotas for the new structural fund programming period 1999-2006?
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 499/98 by Elly PLOOIJ-VAN GORSEL to the Council. Tapping of European telephone, fax and E-mail traffic by the USA
Date: 1998-02-27
Institutions: European Parliament, PLOOIJ-VAN GORSEL
Subjects: EU Member State, European Union, United States, electronic mail, judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the EU, protection of communications, telecommunications, telephone

C 323/42

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

21. 10. 98

(98/C 323/53)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0497/98

by Carmen Fraga Este·vez (PPE) to the Commission

(2 March 1998)

Subject: EU-ACP fisheries trade balance

It  is  of  vital  interest  to  the  European  Union  to  promote  the  development  of  fisheries  in  the  ACP  countries,
including a greater flow of exports from these countries to the EU.

Will the Commission provide information on the trade balance for fisheries products between the EU and the
ACP countries in terms of both volume and value, including:

› 

fishery exports from each ACP country to each Member State;

›  a breakdown by species of exports from each ACP country to each Member State;

› 

fishery imports by each ACP country with details of each exporter Member State;

›  breakdown by species of imports by each ACP country and details of the Member State of origin?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(6 April 1998)

The Community has a very unfavourable balance of trade in fisheries products with the African, Caribbean and
Pacific (ACP) states. In 1996, Community exports to the ACP states amounted to 331 000 tonnes and were worth
ECU 185 million, while imports from them amounted to 378 000 tonnes, worth ECU 1 093 million. Community
exports of fisheries products to the ACP states thus represent only 17% of imports in value terms.

Because  of  the  amount  of  information  involved,  the  Commission  will  send  the  Honourable  Member  and  the
Parliament Secretariat a summary table of the information requested.

(98/C 323/54)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0499/98

by Elly Plooij-van Gorsel (ELDR) to the Council

(27 February 1998)

Subject: Tapping of European telephone, fax and E-mail traffic by the USA

1.

Is the Council aware that EU Member States tap one another(cid:146)s communications on a large scale?

If so, what will the Council do about it?

2.
Does the Council consider that existing legislation in the Union provides adequate means of preventing the
United States or any other country, including the Member States, from using modern technologies unlawfully to
violate the privacy of European citizens and the confidentiality of information?

If not, will the Council ask the Commission to propose European and international rules to combat abuses

3.
of new information and communications technologies?

Answer

(13/14 July 1998)

The Council is aware of publications in the media about the matters referred to by the Honourable Member in
point 1 of her question, but has no information about these practices.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 477/98 by Richard HOWITT to the Commission. Role of Community economic development in future structural fund programmes
Date: 1998-02-27
Institutions: European Parliament, HOWITT
Subjects: EU regional policy, Structural Funds, economic and social cohesion, fight against unemployment, regional development, structural policy













EUR-Lex - 91998E0477 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91998E0477

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 477/98 by Richard HOWITT to the Commission. Role of Community economic development in future structural fund programmes  


Official Journal C 386 , 11/12/1998 P. 0019 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0477/98by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission(27 February 1998)Subject: Role of Community economic development in future structural fund programmesWhat measures is the Commission currently taking to promote the role of Community economic development in structural fund programmes? What role does the production of guidelines, as agreed at the informal Council in Ireland on 14-15 November 1996, play in this, and what is the Commission's initial assessment of their impact? What further options is the Commission currently considering to enhance the role of Community economic development in the next programming period 2000-2006?Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission(22 April 1998)The European strategy of encouraging local development and employment initiatives (ILDE)(1), proposed by the Commission, is gradually being applied.To launch it, the ministers responsible for regional policy and spatial planning broadly reconfirmed at an informal meeting the guidelines they had adopted at the European Conference on local development organised by the Irish Presidency on 11-12 November 1996. These guidelines stressed in particular the need to enrich and strengthen the partnership between actors, to think up new, innovative, integrated strategies for local job creation and to use intermediary coordinating and promotional organisations to implement them. The guidelines were first applied in the new programmes adopted for the regions undergoing industrial restructuring (Objective 2), mainly in Spain, France, Italy and the United Kingdom They were also introduced to a great extent in the other programmes that underwent a mid-term review in 1997. By selecting 89 territorial pacts for employment as proposed by the Member States and as part of a broad partnership involving the private sector, the Commission also sought to give physical expression to these guidelines by introducing and exploiting new forms of local job creation. A global strategy covering personal services, local cultural development or the environment was chosen for most of these pacts.In the 2000-2006 period, the development of endogenous potential must remain a priority for aid from the Structural Funds and from the European Regional Development Fund in particular. Its scope will be extended to include personal services. The Commission is also proposing a strengthened partnership.(1) COM(95) 273 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 445/98 by Concepció FERRER to the Commission. Decentralization of the Interreg II programme
Date: 1998-02-27
Institutions: European Parliament, FERRER
Subjects: EU programme, decentralisation, frontier region, management, operational programme, regional cooperation

C 310/64

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

9. 10. 98

The  EAGGF  contribution  represents  75%  of  expenditure,  as  Ireland  is  an  objective  1  area.  The  Community
contribution is limited to 50% in other regions.

As  a  proportion  of  total  EAGGF  expenditure  on  agri-environment  programmes,  the  amount  spent  on  REPS
represented 4% in 1995, 3% in 1996 and over 6% in 1997. For purposes of comparison, Ireland accounts for 3.3%
of the utilized agricultural area (UAA) of the Community.

Concerning the breakdown by type of measure, the Commission has not yet received a report from Ireland on the
implementation of the programme and the data supplied relates only to overall figures.

The Commission would like to draw the attention of the Honourable Member to the Commission(cid:146)s report (2) on
the application of Regulation (EEC) No 2078/92, submitted to the Parliament on 4 December 1997.

(1)  OJ L 215, 30.7.1992.
(2)  COM(97) 620 final.

(98/C 310/83)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0445/98

by Concepcio· Ferrer (PPE) to the Commission

(27 February 1998)

Subject: Decentralization of the Interreg II programme

The aim of the Interreg II programme is to implement effective mechanisms to facilitate cooperation between
frontier regions.

Some countries have chosen to decentralize the office responsible for managing this programme to the region
concerned, such as France, which has established an office in Toulouse for the Midi-Pyre·ne·es region.

Does the Commission not consider that all Member States should be asked to decentralize the offices responsible
for  the  management  of  this  programme  to  bring  them  into  closer  contact  with  the  situation  in  the  region
concerned  and  with  the  beneficiaries  of  the  programme,  while  at  the  same  time  improving  management
efficiency?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(2 April 1998)

In  the  guidelines  for  the  Interreg  II  operational  programmes (1),  the  Commission  stresses  the  importance  it
attaches to the establishment or development, in cooperation with the regional or local authorities concerned, of
shared institutional or administrative structures in border areas competent to implement projects. The Member
States have been encouraged to take this into account as far as possible.

(1)  OJ C 180, 1.7.1994.

(98/C 310/84)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0447/98

by Concepcio· Ferrer (PPE) to the Commission

(27 February 1998)

Subject: Current situation in the onion sector

The reform of the COM in fruit and vegetables did not take into account the proposal submitted by the European
Parliament calling for onions to be included in Annex II to the relevant regulation to enable it to benefit from
withdrawal premiums.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 469/98 by Richard HOWITT to the Commission. The role of guidelines in agreeing structural funds programmes, as agreed at the informal Council in Ireland (14-15.11.1996)
Date: 1998-02-27
Institutions: European Parliament, HOWITT
Subjects: EU programme, Structural Funds, budget policy

C 402/12

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

22.12.98

On 6-7th April 1998 a scientific meeting organized and supported by the Commission has been held on the
unresolved problem of the persistence of classical swine fever in wild boar in some areas of Germany, Italy and
France. This matter will be further discussed at the standing veterinary committee and at the scientific veterinary
committee, with the aim to review the adequacy of the measures adopted so far.

The economic losses due to the occurrence of the epidemic are difficult to estimate with precision. The affected
Member States compensate the sanitary slaughtering of the pigs in case of outbreak. The Community reimburses
50 % of such costs (estimate of Community participation for 1997 outbreaks: 116.8 MECU). Furthermore the
Commission has adopted several decisions laying down exceptional market support measures in the Member
States affected by the disease. The measures are reimbursed at 70 % by the Community (Community participation
for 1997: 497.59 MECU).

(1) OJ L 47, 21.2.1980.

(98/C 402/012)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0460/98

by Shaun Spiers (PSE) to the Commission

(16 February 1998)

Subject: Welfare of laying hens

When does the Commission intend to bring forward proposals on improving the welfare of laying hens?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(13 March 1998)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question E-115/98 by
Mrs Pollack (1).

(1) OJ C 304, 2.10.1998, p. 33.

(98/C 402/013)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0469/98

by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission

(27 February 1998)

Subject: The role of guidelines in agreeing structural funds programmes, as agreed at the informal Council in

Ireland (14-15.11.1996)

What is the Commission(cid:146)s own evaluation of the extent to which guidelines published by the Commission affect
actual programmes within the Member States? What process is the Commission undertaking to make such an
evaluation? Is it the Commission(cid:146)s intention to include the continuation of such guidelines within its proposed
new structural fund programmes? If so, what new consultation will take place about the guidelines, and by what
date does the Commission expect to approve them?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(6 April 1998)

As indicated in the Commission(cid:146)s document issued on 30 May 1997 (1), the guidelines, together with the
intermediate evaluations of programmes, would form the basis for adjustments in the framework of the overall
mid-term review of the six year programmes 1994-1999.