WRITTEN QUESTION E-1348/00 by Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Institutional reform.
Date: 2000-05-04
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Commissioner, European Parliament, public hearing, staff assessment

20.3.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 89 E/29

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(19 June 2000)

The Commission does not have the details of the Maltese project concerning the conversion of agricultural
land into a golf course.

The three species of reptiles and one of the species of amphibia mentioned as being spotted on the
agricultural land beneath the Verdala Hotel are in fact listed in the annexes of Council Directive 92/43/EEC
of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (1) (Habitats Directive).
As the species Elaphe situla is listed in Annex II of the Habitats Directive, the Maltese authorities are
obliged to propose sites of Community importance and, subsequently, to designate special areas of
conservation (i.e. Natura 2000 sites) for this species upon accession to the Union. The other three species
are mentioned in Annex IV of the Habitats Directive. They are therefore subject to species protection
requirements upon accession, according to Article 12 of the Habitats Directive.

With regard to candidate countries(cid:146) sites protection policies before accession (including Malta(cid:146)s), they are
all subject to the principle,
laid down in Agenda 2000, which states that (cid:145)all new investments should
comply with the acquis(cid:146). This principle has been included in the Union negotiating position on the opening
of the environment chapter with the six (cid:145)Luxembourg countries(cid:146), endorsed by the Council on 7th December
1999.

This implies that the project of a golf course mentioned above, should be submitted to an environmental
impact assessment (EIA) procedure similar to that established in Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June
1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (2) as
amended by 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997 (3). As this kind of project is covered by Annex II of the Directive,
it is up to the authorities in Malta to decide whether a formal EIA is needed, by the screening procedure
established in Article 4. The Maltese authorities should also take into account the protection requirement
procedures established in the Habitats Directive fully, especially those in Article 6 of the Directive, which
concern sites that qualify for Natura 2000. It is the responsibility of the Maltese environmental authorities
to make such appraisal.

In the framework of the pre-accession process, the Commission regularly asks Malta for information about
its progress in the various fields of the aquis. As far as nature protection is concerned, the Commission is
aware that Malta is currently conducting inventories on habitats. In order to prepare the Natura 2000
network, it has already collected substantial data on the location and frequency of the different species
listed in the annexes of the Habitats Directive. By accession, Malta will have to provide a list of sites
proposed under the Habitats Directive and designated under Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April
1979 on the conservaiton of wild birds (4), the Birds Directive. For all these sites, Malta will have to
provide detailed biological data (including location and relevant population data on all species of
Community importance) using the (cid:145)Natura 2000 Standard Data Form(cid:146).

The Commission has already asked the Maltese authorities to propose species and habitats (supported by
scientific information) that they would like to include in the annexes of the Habitats and Birds Directives.
Such proposals will be evaluated and discussed together with Member States.

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.
(2) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.
(3) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997.
(4) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.

(2001/C 89 E/027)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1348/00

by Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(4 May 2000)

Subject: Institutional reform

The report on the reform of the European Commission takes an important first step in addressing the
problems of incompetence and corruption amongst a minority of Commission staff and I congratulate the

C 89 E/30

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.3.2001

Commission on having the courage to face up to the fonctionnaires(cid:146) powerful trade unions. But would it
not be a good idea for those at the very top of the Commission structure (i.e. the Commissioners
themselves) to set their staff a good example by accepting the same stringent performance targets as their
employees and subjecting themselves to an annual evaluation?

Would the Commission please comment on my proposal that each Commissioner book an appointment
with the Parliament once a year for a full and frank two-way analysis of their personal performance and
the performance of their DGs?

Please would the Commission also state whether, in the interests of equity, Commissioners plan to accept
adherence to the same disciplinary procedures as their staff, whereby,
in the most extreme cases,
underperforming Commissioners can be reassigned, again, just like their staff?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(26 June 2000)

The legal basis for staff appraisal is Article 43 of the Staff Regulations, which recommends that staff should
be the subject of a periodical report at least once every two years. This applies only to officials and other
servants of the Communities, with the exception of Grades A1 and A2. For the latter grades, the White
Paper on the administrative reform of the Commission published in March proposes the introduction of a
separate appraisal system (COM(2000) 200, Chapter IV.2, page 11).

The Members of the Commission, unlike the staff covered by Article 43, bear a political responsibility
which is set down in the Treaty and is outside the scope of the Staff Regulations.

All Commissioners willingly attend Parliamentary Committees on a regular basis (cid:129) and much more
frequently than once a year (cid:129) in order to discuss and account for the purposes and results of their
activities in the sector for which they are politically responsible.

As the Honourable Member will know, negotiations on a new inter-institutional agreement on mutual
relations are currently taking place, and the political relationship between Parliament and the Commission
will be integrated within an agreed framework in the future.

Article 160 (ex Article 130c) of the EC Treaty provides for the compulsory retirement of a Member of the
Commission who no longer fulfils the conditions required for the performance of his or her duties or has
been guilty of serious misconduct. In addition, each member of the current Commission has given an
undertaking to the President that he or she will resign their position if asked by the President to do so.

(2001/C 89 E/028)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1358/00

by Francesco Musotto (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Damage caused by the prolonged drought in Sicily

(19 April 2000)

The prolonged and increasingly severe drought is becoming a chronic rather than occasional problem,
with which farmers in the region will have to learn to live in the near future.

Some winter crops have been destroyed whilst spring crops are in serious danger, and this is having an
adverse effect on farms, which are having to cope with the globalisation of markets, and on the already
critical employment situation in the sector.