WRITTEN QUESTION E-2865/00 by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Distribution of the Structural Funds within the RDP for 2000-2006 submitted by the Spanish state.
Date: 2000-09-14
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU financing arrangements, Spain, less-favoured region, operational programme

C 151 E/20

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

22.5.2001

(2001/C 151 E/023)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2865/00

by Camilo Nogueira RomÆn (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(14 September 2000)

Subject: Distribution of the Structural Funds within the RDP for 2000-2006 submitted by the Spanish state

A Galician media organ has claimed that the Commission has urged the authorities of the Spanish state to
reform the RDP (Regional Development Plan) with a view to preventing an excessive dispersal of priorities
and resources over the investments planned. Can the Commission state whether this decision has any
connection with the incorrect distribution of the Structural Funds for the Objective 1 areas, which have up
till now, in many cases, been utilised in the Spanish state in forms contrary to the criteria and objectives of
the Union(cid:146)s regulations?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(6 November 2000)

The amounts allocated to the Spanish regions eligible under Objective 1 of the Structural Funds for the
period 2000-2006, whether from the territorial or the sectoral point of view, were adopted following close
consultation between the Member State and the Commission, as provided for by Article 8 of Council
Regulation (EC) 1260/1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds (1).

On 26 July 2000, the Commission gave its agreement in principle to the Community support framework
(CSF) for these regions. This draft was submitted to the various committees provided for by the above
Regulation and was finally approved by the Commission on 18 October 2000 after these consultations.

The CSF took over nine of the ten priorities set out in the regional development plan. Two priorities
identified in the plan (tourism and cultural heritage, collective facilities and social welfare) were merged
and one new priority (technical assistance) was added. Within each priority, the draft CSF contains further
information clarifying the nature of the assistance to be part-financed.

This partnership procedure is common to all the Member States receiving Community structural assistance.

(1) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.

(2001/C 151 E/024)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2873/00

by Camilo Nogueira RomÆn (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(14 September 2000)

Subject: The Cohesion Fund and the project for constructing a new airport in Madrid in addition to the

previous investment of ESP 300 billion in the existing Madrid airport

The Minister of Public Works of the Spanish state recently announced that not only ESP 300 billion would
be spent on constructing two new runways and a new terminal building at the existing Madrid airport but
work would, in addition, begin imminently on a new airport in Madrid ((cid:145)an airport for southern Spain(cid:146)),
the evident intention being to centralise air traffic within Spanish territory even more than at present, thus
adversely affecting the airport facilities of other regions of the Spanish state, such as Galicia, whose
inhabitants are obliged to change plane numerous times, starting in Madrid, if they wish to fly anywhere in
Europe. Is the Commission aware of this project of the Spanish government? Is the Spanish government
using Cohesion Fund monies to construct the new runways and the new terminal building of the existing
Madrid airport? Following this extraordinary spending, will the Spanish government be able to use
Cohesion Fund monies to construct the new airport in Madrid,
in a centralising act running totally
counter to any prospect of territorial and economic balance within the Spanish state?