WRITTEN QUESTION E-1926/00 by Carles-Alfred Gasòliba i Böhm (ELDR) to the Commission. Fishery resources.
Date: 2000-06-16
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU aid, Mediterranean region (EU), conservation of fish stocks, fishing regulations, fishing season

C 81 E/110

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

13.3.2001

In order to reduce production, when a producer voluntarily surrenders his quota, a quota buy-back
programme exists which could reduce the quantity of tobacco produced (Council Regulation (EEC)
No 2075/92 of 30 June 1992 on the common organization of the market in raw tobacco (1), Commission
Regulation (EC) No 2848/98 of 22 December 1998 laying down detailed rules for the application of
Council Regulation (EEC) No 2075/92 as regards the premium scheme, production quotas and the specific
aid to be granted to producer groups in the raw tobacco sector (2)).

Within the framework of the Community structural policy for 2000-2006, the same regulation also
introduced the possibility to implement rural development programmes to allow tobacco-growing regions
in difficulty to convert to other activities. These programmes can benefit from Community financing
provided under Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 of 17 May 1999 on support for rural development
from the European agricultural guidance and guarantee fund (EAGGF) and amending and repealing certain
Regulations (3).

The conversions to other cultivation offering the same opportunities in terms of employment are
extremely limited since the labour intensity rate of tobacco cultivation is exceptionally high. There is
some experience of converting to the ornamental horticulture sector in some Italian regions. However,
major technical difficulties have so far limited the success of such initiatives.

Furthermore, the Community tobacco fund finances studies of the possibilities for producers of raw
tobacco to switch to other crops or activities. The Commission is currently updating Regulation (EEC)
No 2427/93 of 1 September 1993 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation
(EEC) No 2075/92 with regard to the Community Fund for tobacco research and information (4) following
the Council decision on the Commission(cid:146)s proposal to double the producer levy that underpins this fund.

The conversion of tobacco production towards other activities, whether agricultural or non-agricultural, is
an option to which the Commission continues to pay particular attention. Nevertheless, the main tobacco-
growing zones, notably in Italy and Greece, are concentrated in regions whose development is lagging
behind. Thus, the location of the tobacco-growing areas, which have very few viable economic alternative
solutions to tobacco production, also inhibits any significant move away from this sector.

The biggest obstacle to conversion is not resources, but finding alternatives that offer comparable socio-
economic benefits. Finally, it should be added that the budgetary disciplines agreed between the institutions
preclude the transfer of further funds from market support to structural programmes.

(1) OJ L 215, 30.7.1992.
(2) OJ L 358, 31.12.1998.
(3) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999.
(4) OJ L 223, 2.9.1993.

(2001/C 81 E/132)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1926/00

by Carles-Alfred Gas(cid:242)liba i B(cid:246)hm (ELDR) to the Commission

(16 June 2000)

Subject: Fishery resources

In recent years fishermen(cid:146)s associations in the Valencia region have been observing close seasons, which
have proved to be a satisfactory means of conserving fishery resources.

The close season observed by fishermen in the Valencia region ought to be extended to cover the
Mediterranean as a whole, and Spanish areas thereof in particular, so as to render it more effective and
replenish fishing grounds in that area of the Mediterranean.

13.3.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 81 E/111

The close season in the Valencia region enjoys direct funding from the Autonomous Community of
Valencia, with earmarked resources virtually amounting to nothing.

Does the Commission intend to authorise set periods in which fishing activity would cease and make them
compulsory in the Mediterranean basin?

Is it considering allocating financial resources to assist fishermen and fishermen(cid:146)s associations during the
close season, so as to ensure that fishing grounds in the Mediterranean are properly maintained and
replenished?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(12 July 2000)

Seasonal closure of fishing activities is a technical measure that might benefit fishery resources assuming
that it is suited to the target species, with respect to the temporal coverage and the geographical area. Thus
it is always required to state which species are meant when dealing with such measures. In addition it must
not be considered as a panacea since like other measures it has limits (e.g. increase of effort out of the
closed season). Seasonal closures must be part of an overall integrated management system which includes
other measures.

Within Council Regulation (EC) No 1626/94 of 27 June 1994 laying down certain technical measures the
fishery resources in the Mediterranean (1) and successive amendments (in particular
conservation of
Regulation (EC) No 812/2000 (2)) there is a temporal closure for the bluefin tuna fishery with encircling
nets from 1 to 31 May in the Adriatic Sea, and from 16 July to 15 August in the whole Mediterranean
excluding the Adriatic Sea.

At present the Commission does not intend to implement other seasonal closures within the Mediterra-
nean basin. However Member States may continue to legislate by adopting measures supplementary to, or
going beyond the minimum requirements of the system established by Regulation 1626/94, provided such
measures are compatible with Community law and in conformity with the common fishery policy.

Seasonal closure of fishing activities, as part of the ongoing management of fisheries, being a recurrent
seasonal suspension of activity cannot be supported by Community funds.

(1) OJ L 171, 6.7.1994.
(2) OJ L 100, 20.4.2000.

(2001/C 81 E/133)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1929/00

by Bartho Pronk (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(16 June 2000)

Subject: ESF-3 single planning document for the period 2000-2006

The Commission is at present in the concluding stage of negotiations with the Netherlands on the ESF-3
single planning document for the period 2000-2006. The Netherlands Government is proposing that two
priorities, namely Pro-active employment policy and Lifelong learning, should be the only ones entitled to
apply for ESF funds.

Is this approach not likely to result in the ESF in effect taking charge of regular expenditure for

1.
employment and the Netherlands vocational training system?

How will the Commission ensure that the ultimate recipients, including local authorities, not only the
2.
communes belonging to the G25 but also the other communes where the projects are actually being
carried out, do not receive less funding?

Is it possible to safeguard transparency and additionality in the proposals of

3.
Government?

the Netherlands