WRITTEN QUESTION E-0846/00 by Marie-Arlette Carlotti (PSE) to the Commission. Action of the European Union against anti-personnel landmines.
Date: 2000-03-21
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: anti-personnel weapon, common foreign and security policy

28.12.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 374 E/169

Greece(cid:146)s relative position in relation to the transposition of internal market rules has deteriorated in the
last two years. According to the December 1999 Scoreboard statistics, 90 directives that should have been
implemented by Greece by 15 November 1999 had not been transposed, compared to 19 directives
overdue for Denmark, the best performing Member State and compared to an average of 52 directives
taking all Member States together.

(1) SEC(1999) 2043.
(2) COM(1999) 624 final.

(2000/C 374 E/199)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0846/00

by Marie-Arlette Carlotti (PSE) to the Commission

(21 March 2000)

Subject: Action of the European Union against anti-personnel landmines

The Commission has adopted a proposal for a regulation on anti-personnel mines.

(cid:129) In the budgetary domain, horizontal line B7-661 has had its legitimacy strengthened. Does this mean
that anti-personnel mine action programmes in all their diversity are to be financed exclusively from
this line?

In view of the particular approach adopted vis-(cid:224)-vis humanitarian mine clearance by the NGOs, which
favour integrating mine clearance in an overall development approach, what measures will be taken to
ensure the actual access of NGOs to Union financing?

(cid:129) For the purposes of implementing EU actions against anti-personnel mines, the principle of aid being
conditional on accession to and observance of the Ottawa Convention is accepted. This principle is
subject to exceptions in the case of assistance to victims and is coupled with a proposal to assist the
applicant countries in applying the Convention(cid:146)s provisions.

What will be the relevant criteria and detailed arrangements, which should not bring about on the
ground a (cid:145)double victimisation(cid:146) of certain vulnerable communities?

(cid:129) In the context of stepping up EU action for the actual implementation of the Convention and its
universalisation, how large has been the place given to anti-personnel mines in the political dialogue
with the Union(cid:146)s partners and, more especially, with the countries applying for accession?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(26 April 2000)

1.
The communication and proposal for a regulation recently presented by the Commission are aimed,
on the one hand, at enabling the EU to devise a more active and consistent strategy on anti-personnel
mines, and on the other, at giving the necessary legal basis and both a horizontal and specific purpose to
budget heading B7-661, which was created by Parliament in 1996 but had no legal basis until now.

The approach adopted was to formulate an overall policy framework for EU action on anti-personnel
mines, within which the relevant sectoral and regional/local measures could be situated. The projects
undertaken may be financed by the horizontal budget line, or by existing regional/local programmes. This
approach will enable us to integrate into the overall strategy a number of projects of common interest to
any mine clearance activity, for example systematic plans to assess past or ongoing operations, the
evaluation of the needs of both the population and the mine clearance units, the drafting of regional and
multiannual plans, verification of the aims pursued, rationalisation of instruments and interventions, and
guarantees that EU operations are consistent with its commitments under the Ottawa Convention.

C 374 E/170

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

28.12.2000

Once the Regulation is adopted, a multilateral exercise to programme anti-mine activities will be launched.
It will be based on the general policy guidelines and will include both horizontal activities and activities
linked to particular countries or regions. The multiannual programme will be published and will therefore
be accessible to all non-governmental organisations. The latter are already the main recipients of
Community funds, directly or indirectly. Partnership agreements are also planned to execute the multi-
annual projects.

2. With regard to the criteria to be applied to helping people affected by anti-personnel mines in
countries that have not signed up to the Ottawa Convention, the Commission is carefully verifying several
factors, sometimes individually, sometimes together; firstly, as the question suggests, information on the
state of the affected population groups for whom a country requests mine clearance assistance; the
country(cid:146)s practice with regard to the production and storage of and trade in mines; the degree of
acceptance of support measures for accession to the Convention, and verification that neither commercial
nor scientific goals are being pursued with the aid of Community assistance. It is also important, in some
to know how the mines (or unexploded devices) came to be laid. This list of background
cases,
information is not exhaustive but gives an idea of the approach the Commission intends to adopt.

3.
This approach is obviously reflected in political dialogue both with the countries which have applied
for membership and with other countries. The proposed Regulation, which is not limited to mines but
covers all unexploded devices, also addresses the problems of storage and accumulation of such devices.
The Commission wastes no opportunity to cooperate with non-member countries to speed up the
eradication of this scourge, both by improving coordination of our respective policies and by putting
together the resources necessary to develop better instruments and strategies.

(2000/C 374 E/200)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0847/00

by Marie-Arlette Carlotti (PSE) to the Commission

(21 March 2000)

Subject: Installation of a delegation to Havana and cooperation with Cuba

Recently Cuba officially requested its accession to the ACP-EU agreements. At a time when this partnership
is starting up again on a new basis, we must open the door to Cuba to encourage its own opening.

Currently, Cuba is the only country in Latin America and the Caribbean not to have concluded a
cooperation framework agreement with the European Union.

With a rapid accession to the new ACP-EU agreement it should be possible to proceed to a cooperation
framework agreement with a view to formalising and redefining the cooperative ties between Cuba and the
European Union.

The early installation of a Commission Delegation to Havana would open the way to intensifying the
dialogue with the authorities and all sectors of Cuban society to define future cooperation between the
European Union and Cuba.

Is such a plan being considered by the Commission? If so, how soon?

How does the Commission propose to strengthen and formalise cooperation with Cuba?

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(12 May 2000)

For the Honourable Member(cid:146)s first question concerning the opening of a Commission delegation in Cuba,
pleas see the reply to Written Question E-0615/00 from Mr Miranda (1).