WRITTEN QUESTION E-1771/99 by Horst Schnellhardt (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Structural Fund programme approvals made subject to area notifications pursuant to the Flora, Fauna and Habitats (FFH) and Bird Protection Directive.
Date: 1999-10-11
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Germany, Structural Funds, bird, environmental protection, infringement procedure (EU), operation of the Institutions, protected area, terrestrial ecosystem

C 225 E/18

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

8.8.2000

No donor agency can give an estimate on the impact their operations have on poverty reduction.
5.
Therefore the Commission is presently contributing to a working group within the DAC to resolve this
problem, having suggested a possible methodology for a better grasp of the impact of operations on the
reduction of poverty. This methodology tries to capture both qualitative and quantitative data on poverty
and link this to the actual operations being undertaken. It will be discussed in a DAC evaluation working
group in Edinburgh on 13-14 October 1999, after which it will be decided how to develop this
methodology.

6.
The study found that the 1993 policy on poverty reduction remained valid, but that more effort was
needed on implementation. This reflected the Commission(cid:146)s own working paper of 1998. The Commission
is now actively participating in the DAC working group that is overhauling its approach, with the
intention of producing guidelines by June 2000.

This is the intention of the methodology being developed, as it brings together poor people(cid:146)s own
7.
assessments with data from other sources. A pilot test was undertaken in Burkina Faso that confirmed the
validity of the methodology. The test, however, was not intended as a full impact study of operations in
Burkina Faso since there were several technical issues to resolve (cid:129) the weight to be given to indirect and
direct operations, the links between qualitative and quantitative data, and attribution of the results to
operations or other external factors among others.

(1) COM(93) 518 final.
(2) Doc. 8541/98, 12.5.1998.

(2000/C 225 E/019)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1771/99

by Horst Schnellhardt (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(11 October 1999)

Subject: Structural Fund programme approvals made subject to area notifications pursuant to the Flora,

Fauna and Habitats (FFH) and Bird Protection Directive

By letter of 23 June 1999 to the Permanent Representatives of the Federal Republic of Germany in the
European Union, Commission Members Mrs Monika Wulf-Mathies and Mrs Ritt Bjerregaard pointed out
that, in application of Article 12 of the Structural Fund Framework Regulation, it might well be impossible
for German Structural Fund programmes for the 2000 to 2006 assistance period to be approved by the
European Commission.

Does the Commission consider it lawful and reasonable in this connection for the approval of Structural
Fund programmes and projects submitted by Germany to be made subject to whether or not area
notifications pursuant to the Flora, Fauna and Habitats (FFH) and Bird Protection Directive have been
submitted in their entirety?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(18 November 1999)

As the Honourable Member will be aware, the finalisation of the list of sites of Community importance
(Natura 2000),
including areas related to both Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the
conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (1) and Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April
1979 on the conservation of wild birds (2) was supposed to be complete by June 1998, but has been
delayed because several Member States have so far failed to provide their corresponding proposals
(deadline was June 1995). The lack of
funds
operations has resulted in problems and delays in the implementation of the current programmes.
Moreover, at this time there are several Court proceedings pending against several Member States, as
regards insufficient transmission of proposed protected sites.

identification of respective sites affected by structural

8.8.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 225 E/19

In view of the delayed designation of protected sites, and in order to ensure that the Commission can fulfil
its obligations under the EC Treaty (Article 6 (cid:129) ex Article 3c) and Articles 12 and 41 (2) (b) of Council
Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on the structural funds (3),
all Member States were reminded by letter of 23 June 1999 of their duty to ensure conformity of new
programmes and projects with the requirements of the Habitats and Birds directives. In the case of some
Member States, there remains a serious lack of information on protected sites which might jeopardise the
Commission(cid:146)s assessment whether programmes are in conformity with Community law as required by
Article 12 of Council Regulation (EC) 1260/1999.

In any case the Commission will assess each plan or programme as to its individual content related to the
requirements of
in the respective plan or
programme, give a firm commitment that any possible negative impact on sites protected or to be
protected under Natura 2000 will be properly assessed and appropriate measures taken.

the Habitats and Birds directives. Member States must

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.
(2) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.
(3) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.

(2000/C 225 E/020)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1774/99

by Hugues Martin (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(11 October 1999)

Subject: Compliance with Community rules in the footwear sector

Footwear manufacturers have drawn my attention to conditions of competition in this industry within the
EU.

These industrialists, mostly from small and medium-sized undertakings, complain about the failure of
competing companies in other EU Member States to comply with Community rules.

It appears that the authorities in these Member States do not enforce rules such as those requiring
machines to be brought into conformity with European standards or the prohibition on undeclared
employment.

Infringement of such rules causes unacceptable distortions of competition in the European internal market
within a sector which is also exposed to (cid:145)aggressive(cid:146) competition from outside the Community.

Will the Commission enlighten us on the subject and, if possible, indicate what measures it intends to take
to remedy the problem?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(9 December 1999)

The Commission agrees that undeclared work is an important preoccupation for the social partners in
sectors such as footwear, textile and clothing. The 1999 Employment Guidelines, as adopted by the
Council (1), and the Commission proposals for the year 2000 (2) refer to the need to tackle the problem.
This issue is also under discussion by the social partners at European level within the framework of the
sectoral social dialogue on the basis of the Commission action plan concerning the competitiveness of the
textile and clothing industry (3). In particular, the social dialogue committee on footwear is examining the
undeclared work and health and safety issues such as machine safety.

All the Member States have sent the Commission their national measures implementing Council Directive
89/655/EEC of 30 November 1989 concerning the minimum safety and health requirements for the use of
work equipment by workers at work (4). The conformity of these national
implementing measures is
currently being analysed, and infringement proceedings have already been instituted against certain
Member States for failure to transpose the Directive properly. Council Directive 95/63/EC of 5 December