WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1631/98 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Annual Report of the Cohesion Fund (1996)
Date: 1998-05-27
Institutions: AMADEO, European Parliament
Subjects: Cohesion Fund, activity report, ecology, environmental protection, organic farming, peripheral region, public health, quality of life, rail transport, regional aid













EUR-Lex - 91998E1631 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91998E1631

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1631/98 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Annual Report of the Cohesion Fund (1996)  


Official Journal C 031 , 05/02/1999 P. 0064 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-1631/98by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission(27 May 1998)Subject: Annual Report of the Cohesion Fund (1996)With regard to the Annual Report of the Cohesion Fund (1996) (COM(97) 302 final), can the Commission ensure:1. greater diversification and better balance in the allocation of appropriations to the various types of transport infrastructure so as to favour rail and maritime transport, which make a greater contribution to the protection of the environment;2. that greater attention is paid, in the environmental field, to the protection and conservation of natural resources and countryside of great ecological value and to the quality of life of citizens/town dwellers;3. greater support for the creation of environmental and transport infrastructures in the outermost regions?Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission(8 July 1998)1. The Commission agrees that the balance of funding should be shifted away from road projects and can assure Parliament that the share of rail projects will increase in the future. The 1997 annual report will confirm this trend. However, it is important to note that road remains the best way to ensure accessibility to the outermost continental regions.2. In the Commission's experience, greater involvement for the Cohesion fund in the area of protection and conservation of natural resources and the countryside would imply the need to manage a large number of projects costing less than 10 MECU. However, the rules provide that projects in this category can only be approved if duly justified. The Commission is therefore of the opinion that it should continue to give priority to the most urgent environmental deficiencies in the beneficiary Member States, in particular to those affecting human health. There has been so far no shortage of large environmental projects. In any case, the Commission does not have the staff resources to deal with a large number of small projects.It remains possible, however, to make exceptions to this general rule if a Member State submits suitable nature conservation projects.It may also be noted that projects for the protection and conservation of natural resources and the countryside can be financed within the framework of European agricultural guidance and guarantee fund (EAGGF) measures, including Council Regulation (EEC) 2078/92(1) on agricultural production methods compatible with the requirements of the protection of the environment and the maintenance of the countryside.3. The Cohesion fund can co-finance such investments provided that appropriate fundable projects, justified on economic or environmental grounds, are presented.(1) OJ L 215, 30.7.1992.