WRITTEN QUESTION E-2123/99 by Gianfranco Dell'Alba (TDI) to the Commission. Objective 2 for the 2000-2006 period and the reasons for the rejection of Italy's proposals.
Date: 1999-11-24
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU regional policy, Italy, Structural Funds, eligibility criteria, regulation (EU), terms for aid

8.8.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 225 E/53

(2000/C 225 E/052)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2105/99

by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(22 November 1999)

Subject: New methods for finding persons trapped inside the wreckage of buildings

The recent earthquakes in Turkey, Greece and other countries around the world have drawn attention to
the extremely serious issue of persons trapped inside the wreckage of buildings and the need for effective
search and rescue methods.

Up to now rescue teams have been using accounts and information given by survivors, sound detection
(acoustic method) and micro-cameras (visual method), as well as trained dogs.

According to experts, other methods of finding trapped persons could be developed and used, based on
the detection of chemicals emitted by the human body in various situations, and especially in difficult
circumstances such as being trapped in buildings which have collapsed.

It appears that methods like these have been tested for military purposes.

Would the Commission be willing to aid the development and use of similar methods for use by rescue
teams dealing with earthquakes and trapped victims?

Answer given by Mrs Wallstr(cid:246)m on behalf of the Commission

(24 January 2000)

The Commission has in the past financed at least one pilot project to build an appliance which uses
microwave radar to detect persons trapped in rubble. The Honourable Member is referred to the
Commission(cid:146)s Internet site at the following address: http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/environment/civil/
prote/cpactiv/cpact08e.htm, where further information on the project is available.

Under the Community action programme in the field of civil protection, it falls to the national authorities
to determine the content and scope of any pilot projects in this area with a view to incorporating the
results into rescue team practice. On this basis, the Commission will be prepared to examine the funding
of a project proposed in this area.

Research and development related to novel technical solutions may be granted financial Community
support within the fifth framework programme for RTD (1), provided that the rules of participation as well
as the contents of the workplans of the thematic programmes are respected.

(1) OJ L 26, 1.2.1999.

(2000/C 225 E/053)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2123/99

by Gianfranco Dell(cid:146)Alba (TDI) to the Commission

(24 November 1999)

Subject: Objective 2 for the 2000-2006 period and the reasons for the rejection of Italy(cid:146)s proposals

The Commission has declared the Italian government(cid:146)s proposals concerning the areas eligible for
Objective 2 for the 2000-2006 period (cid:145)inadmissible(cid:146), has refused to examine their contents, and has
asked the government to rewrite them all.

This refusal
is likely to delay considerably the allocation of funds to the regions and the subsequent
implementation of structural policies, and also to jeopardise, perhaps to the benefit of other countries, the
funds(cid:146) commitment and expenditure capacities.

C 225 E/54

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

8.8.2000

When the framework regulation on the Structural Funds was adopted, the Commission was supposed to
have committed itself to taking into account the particular circumstances of individual Member States
when making an overall examination of the eligible zones.

Can the Commission answer the following questions:

1. What are the reasons that have led to this drastic decision, for which there is not even any provision

in the above-mentioned regulation?

2. Does the Commission not consider that it has failed to take sufficient account of possible opportu-

nities for derogation connected with Italy(cid:146)s particular circumstances?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(21 January 2000)

The proposed list of areas eligible for Objective 2 sent to the Commission by the Italian authorities
1.
on 1 October 1999 was considered not to be acceptable because it did not comply with Article 4(4) of
Council Regulation No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural
Funds (1). This paragraph stipulates that in each Member State the areas meeting the (cid:145)Community(cid:146) criteria
laid down in Article 4(5) and (6) must contain at least 50 % of the population eligible for Objective 2
assistance. However, the areas put forward by the Italian authorities in compliance with these criteria
contained only 2,2 million people (i.e. only 29,6 % of the total eligible population).

2.
The Commission considers that the Regulation, which was adopted by all the Member States and
received the assent of the European Parliament, provides considerable scope for accommodating the
specific circumstances of Italy and that it is not necessary to resort to derogations from the regulatory
framework.

For example, the Italian authorities are not obliged to submit a proposal for all of the areas meeting the
Community criteria (the population of which is 5 021 900). All they are required to submit is a list of
areas satisfying these criteria in which the total population is at least 3 701 000.

They are also permitted to calculate 50 % of the eligible population according to (cid:145)national(cid:146) criteria laid
down in Article 4(7) to (9) of the Regulation.

(1) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.

(2000/C 225 E/054)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2124/99

by Antonio Tajani (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(24 November 1999)

Subject: The United Kingdom and the transposition of the Community directives relating to insurance

against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles

In the United Kingdom at present, the Road Traffic Act 1991 prescribes a sentence of between five and ten
years(cid:146) imprisonment in cases concerning careless and/or reckless driving causing death, while the level of
civil compensation laid down is insignificant and offensive to the feelings of the family, equating as it does
a human life with the cost of a small car.

The European Union has already legislated on this matter to bring about the approximation of the Member
States(cid:146) laws (Directive 72/166/EEC (1) of 24 April 1972 and Directive 84/5/EEC (2)) and Directive 90/232/
EEC (3) of 14 May 1990 specifically states that (cid:145)motor vehicle accident victims should be guaranteed
comparable treatment
irrespective of where in the Community accidents occur(cid:146). The deadline for
transposition of this directive was 31 December 1992 and any extensions are exclusively limited to the
(cid:145)Member States whose economies show differences in development(cid:146) and, therefore, do not apply to the
United Kingdom.