WRITTEN QUESTION E-3093/00 by Ioannis Averoff (PPE-DE) and Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Funding for Greece for reafforestation and flood prevention schemes.
Date: 2000-10-04
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Central Greece, EU financing, Epirus, Greece, Peloponnese, afforestation, flood

C 174 E/18

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

19.6.2001

A new series of country evaluations under the Phare programme is at an early planning stage.

(1) C-2000-3103-2.

(2001/C 174 E/017)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3093/00

by Ioannis Averoff (PPE-DE)
and Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(4 October 2000)

Subject: Funding for Greece for reafforestation and flood prevention schemes

Although the Commission has been asked repeatedly in the past about the number of flood prevention
and reafforestation schemes it has funded in Greece, it has hitherto failed to give clear answers as to the
precise programmes which have received funding, the exact amounts made available, and the results of
those programmes. Following the summer fires, which affected almost the whole of Greece, both Attica
and many regions of provincial Greece, particularly Epirus and the Peloponnese, are threatened by
flooding.

Can the Commission state specifically:

1. how many flood prevention schemes it has funded in Greece, exactly which projects are involved, the

amount of finance per project, and whether the projects have been fully completed,

2. where exactly reafforestation has been carried out in Greece; whether the frequently announced

reafforestation of Pendeli in Attica, for example, has been completed, and

3. what measures the Greek Government has taken to use up Community funds in response to this year(cid:146)s

disasters, and how the Commission responded to the Greek Government(cid:146)s requests?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(20 November 2000)

In future, the new (cid:145)management information system(cid:146)

There is currently no computerised and standardised information system making it possible to rapidly
identify flood control projects and their main features. However, working together with the regional
authorities in the three regions to which the Honourable Members refer particularly, namely Attica, the
Peloponnese and Epirus, the Commission has compiled a detailed list of projects which can be made
available if desired.
(MIS) should ensure better
transparency of implementation. As regards the flood control projects part-financed so far in Greece
under the above three regional programmes in the Community support framework that is now nearing
completion (CSF II), a total number of 102 projects to combat flooding have been part-funded by the
European Regional Development Fund (ERDF). The volumes committed and payments made so far are set
out in the following table. Under the subsidiarity principle, the selection of individual schemes falls to the
national government. It is worth noting that eligible expenditure under CSF II can still be made by final
recipients up to 31 December 2001.

Region

Attica

Peloponnese

Epirus

Number
of projects

Committed
amounts

Take-up
amounts

(In million euro)

26

(cid:129)

76

Total

102

25,0

0

4,3

29,3

24,0

0

3,9

27,9

19.6.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 174 E/19

Under CSF II and the Community initiatives covered by the EAGGF Guidance Section in 1994-1999, a
total of € 159 million was allocated to the forestry sector in Greece as part of a national operational
programme and € 134,2 million as part of 13 regional operational programmes. The Community
contribution was 75 %. The public expenditure under the regional programmes has gone towards
complementary measures targeted more selectively than under the national programme (measures of a
horizontal nature).

So far, most of this funding has been taken up by Greece: € 150 million under the national programme
and € 105,6 million under the regional programmes. The remaining expenditure committed for 1994-
1999 can be carried out by Greece up to mid-2001.

Turning more particularly to the three regions in question, i.e. Attica, the Peloponnese and Epirus, the
ratio of commitments to take-up is as follows:

Region

Committed
amounts

Take-up
amounts

(In million euro)

Attica

Peloponnese

Western Greece

Epirus

13,3

12,0

7,8

13,8

8,9

12,0

6,0

12,2

These sums cover a broad range of activities and a multitude of interlinked project sites in the forestry
laying of forestry roads, stabilising of river banks,
sector, such as fire prevention, forest protection,
reafforestation and forestry development. The number of schemes and the figures above show the intensity
of effort in the forestry sector in Greece, including reafforestation in Attica which contains the Penteli
mountains. In fact, during the period in question, 2 229 hectares were reafforested in Attica, 1 369 ha in
the Peloponnese and 727 ha in Epirus.

Under CSF III for Greece (2000-2006), the Greek national and regional authorities have already made
major requests for funding in the forestry sector in their draft national and regional operational
programmes, including reafforestation and anti-flooding works. The Commission is currently negotiating
these programmes with the national and regional authorities with a view to finalisation soon. The number
of works and schemes in the fields of reafforestation and flood control will appear in the programming
complements that are to be submitted by the Greek authorities to the Commission after it has adopted
these programmes.

(2001/C 174 E/018)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3108/00

by Gorka Kn(cid:246)rr Borr(cid:224)s (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(29 September 2000)

Subject: State laws on language issues

On 5 September, the French Presidency of the Council, on behalf of the European Union, welcomed the
fact that the Latvian government had adopted the decrees implementing the law on the country(cid:146)s official
language. The OECD(cid:146)s high commissioner for national minorities, Max Van der Stoel, claims that these
decrees fully meet the undertakings given by Latvia at international level.

There can be no question that it is incumbent on the European Union to ensure that human rights and
minority rights in the applicant countries are respected. These are essential prerequisites for the accession
of any country, as laid down by the Copenhagen criteria. But within the European Union itself, there are
Member States whose laws on language issues and the recognition of minorities leave a lot to be desired.