WRITTEN QUESTION E-2350/00 by Véronique Mathieu (EDD) to the Commission. Community forestry strategy.
Date: 2000-07-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European forestry policy

C 89 E/186

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.3.2001

(2001/C 89 E/208)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2347/00

by Olivier Dupuis (TDI) to the Commission

(13 July 2000)

Subject: Connivance between traffickers and anti-drugs authorities

In May 2000, the US Congress committee for the secret services published the conclusions of the
parliamentary inquiry into the role of the CIA in the support given to the Nicaraguan (cid:145)Contras(cid:146) in the
early 1980s.

During the hearings, which were held in camera, former CIA agents confirmed that the (cid:145)Contras(cid:146) were
allowed to benefit from a policy of (cid:145)active tolerance(cid:146) with the (cid:145)blessing(cid:146) of the US secret services, which
enabled them to self-finance their armed campaign, thanks to the profits of an extensive cocaine-trafficking
network.

these circumstances? Does the Commission consider these dubious
Was the Commission aware of
practices to be a purely exceptional phenomenon in terms of anti-drugs-trafficking policy, or is it, on the
contrary, in possession of similar information for other regions of the world, for recent years or for today?
Does the Commission not consider that, in view of the seriousness of this case, it should raise the matter
in the relevant international forums, beginning with the UN(cid:146)s anti-drugs authority (the UNDCP)? Does the
Commission not also consider that, in view of the seriousness of the matter, it should propose, as a matter
of urgency, the revision of the international conventions on narcotics with a view to creating a single legal
framework to cover all activities related to the production of marketing

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(20 September 2000)

The Commission was not informed of the facts referred to by the Honourable Member.

The link between the financing of armed conflicts and drugs stems from considerable illegal profits such
trafficking generates. The Commission points out that the European Union(cid:146)s strategy does not accept illegal
practices.

Within its sphere of responsibility, the Commission is committed to the fight against illegal activities linked
to drugs, whether production, processing or trafficking, both at international level and within the EU.

Since the Commission is not informed of these matters, it considers that it cannot bring them before the
appropriate international bodies. However, it is taking resolute action against international crime, on an
international level and in co-operation with other partners such as the United States. It cannot propose a
review of international conventions on narcotics on the basis of facts about which it has no direct
knowledge.

(2001/C 89 E/209)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2350/00

by VØronique Mathieu (EDD) to the Commission

(13 July 2000)

Subject: Community forestry strategy

The objectives defined by the Commission in 1988 in its communication COM(88) 255 (1) entitled
(cid:145)Community strategy and action programme for the forestry sector(cid:146) include the recreational dimension of
forests.

20.3.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 89 E/187

Can the Commission explain the meaning of its reference to the (cid:145)recreational

1.
woodland(cid:146)?

function of the

Can it state what type of initiatives to develop the recreational function of forests have already been

2.
implemented?

(1) OJ C 312, 7.12.1988, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(7 September 2000)

The recreational function of woodlands covers the whole range of forest services including providing
public and leisure facilities. These services are often based on the perception of the natural environment
that an urban population has. The activities in question can undermine the other dimensions of
woodlands, namely the environmental and economic ones. What is more, there are also incompatibilities
between the various forms of leisure (walking, cycling, horse riding, hunting). It is up to the owners and
managers of woodlands to ensure that they are managed and used in such a way as to fulfil all their
functions in the best way possible.

Initiatives to develop the recreational dimension of forests vary according to local conditions. They are
implemented by private and public woodland owners and can cover among other things access, facilities
and the structure of forest stands.

Under Article 30 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 of 17 May 1999 on support for rural
development from the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) (1), the Community
can take part in the funding of investments in forests that are intended to improve significantly their
economic, environmental and social value.

(1) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999.

(2001/C 89 E/210)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2351/00

by William Abitbol (UEN) to the Commission

(13 July 2000)

Subject: EIB control of the EIF

Following the authorisation of its Board of Governors on 5 June 2000, the European Investment Bank
obtained, on 19 June 2000, the majority of the shareholders of the European Investment Fund enabling it
to assume control over that Fund.

In this way, by an astute manoeuvre which alters the ownership structure of the Fund, the EIB has
managed, on the pretext of rationalisation of its activities, to purge the Fund, in significant (cid:129) and sufficient
(cid:129) numbers, of its private shareholders. This has happened despite the opposition of the French banks,
who were effectively left to fight the battle alone, even though the matter affects the EU(cid:146)s entire network of
local banks and, through them, the tissue of our small and medium-sized enterprises.

Without calling the operation itself into question, even if it may be contested on a number of grounds, one
may legitimately draw attention to its immediate effects: it will put the brakes on any real activity of the
Fund in support of SMEs, and will mean suspension of the currently operational contracts.

As if this were not enough, the absence of an operational structure for this (cid:145)new-look(cid:146) (or subordinate)
Fund is compounded by the hasty repeal of the old statutes under which the EIF(cid:146)s activities could be
reserved for SMEs in the Union. This will now allow non-EU, non-banking establishments to benefit from
the funds disbursed (cid:129) until the contrary is proved (cid:129) from the public coffers of the Member States.

In view of this prospect, SMEs in the Union quite justifiably fear that their access to funding will become
even more problematic. One may join them in asking whether the EIB, which now enjoys undivided
control, genuinely intends, via the Fund, to make aid to the Union(cid:146)s SMEs its main priority.