WRITTEN QUESTION P-3544/00 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Olympic Games.
Date: 2000-11-09
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU financing, Greece, Olympic games, Structural Funds, economic infrastructure

6.6.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 163 E/157

contradictory information contained in the report from the (cid:145)Inter-Congregational Commission of Justice
and Peace(cid:146) in Bogota also sent to Mr Nielsen(cid:146)s office:

1. Would the Commission please seek clarification from its information sources in the region on the

human rights situation?

2. Would the European Commission please establish why (cid:145)The Commission for Investigation(cid:146), established
by the Colombian Government to investigate the murder of six men in Fr Forde(cid:146)s (cid:145)peace community(cid:146)
village of La Union on 8 July, has issued no report or statement on its findings?

3. Could the Commission reassure me and the family of Fr Forde that the Commission is doing whatever
it can to influence and help end the abuses of human rights that are occurring in Colombia and
Fr Forde(cid:146)s village?

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-3537/00 and E-3538/00
given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(13 December 2000)

Immediately after the massacre in (cid:145)La Uni(cid:243)n(cid:146) took place the Union called on the Colombian Government
to investigate the exact circumstances of this crime. The Colombian Government established a commission
of inquiry on the massacre, consisting of officials from the Public Prosecutor(cid:146)s, the Attorney General(cid:146)s and
the Ombudsman(cid:146)s Office. They have carried out two investigation missions, the last at the beginning
of November, although they have not issued their report yet. International pressure should certainly be
maintained in order to ensure that those responsible are brought to justice.

The Union has consistently stressed the importance of making progress on human rights issues. The most
recent opportunity took place on 24 October 2000 in Bogota, when Colombia convened an international
meeting on support for the peace process. The Commission(cid:146)s perception is that there is increasing
willingness from the Colombian authorities to respond to these claims. First steps have been taken by the
government (the lay-off of army officers involved in human rights violations, trial of military personnel
before civilian courts). But there is obviously still a long way to go and the international community
should continue its active human-rights policy.

The Commission is aware of the detainee situation of the peace community of La Uni(cid:243)n/UrabÆ, where
Father Forde is working. Nevertheless, the Commission is actively supporting the peace communities
through specific actions carried out by the non-governmental organisations to meet their needs for
humanitarian aid. It also supports these communities through active participation in the (cid:145)Mesa por la paz
en UrabÆ(cid:146) (a platform for peace consisting of different national and international entities) which monitors
the human rights situation in the area of the peace communities.

(2001/C 163 E/177)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3544/00

by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(9 November 2000)

Subject: Olympic Games

The Commission(cid:146)s replies to my previous questions on the possibility of projects and activities connected
with the 2004 Olympic Games in Athens being funded by Community appropriations, perhaps at the
expense of funding for regional development and the environment, stated that, in the first place, the Greek
Government had made no requests for such funding and in any case that such requests would not be
looked on favourably. For some weeks now the Greek press has been saying constantly that significant
Community funds will be directed towards covering the costs of the Olympic Games budget.

Can the Commission say whether it now intends to fund specific projects or actions connected with the
Olympic Games, and state the amounts concerned? What are the developmental aims of this funding?
From which appropriations originally allocated for other purposes will funding be diverted?

C 163 E/158

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

6.6.2001

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(12 December 2000)

Holding the Olympic Games in 2004 presents Greece with both an opportunity and a challenge. The
Structural Funds, although not directly involved during the previous programming period 1994-1999,
have already been contributing substantially to preparing for the Games by part-financing major public
work such as Spata airport, the outer ring road for Athens and the underground railway, as well as the
motorways linking Greece(cid:146)s main cities to the capital. These projects have a major role to play and will
help to make the Olympic Games a success.

In the context of implementing the Community support framework (CSF) for the current programming
period 2000-2006, it is likely that some of the infrastructure projects to be part-financed will be indirectly
useful to holding the Olympic Games. However, the main selection criterion remains the positive impact
on sustainable socio-economic development in the Member State, which means that facilities purely for
sports cannot be funded.

Selecting projects under the CSF is the responsibility of the authorities managing the various operational
programmes to be approved by the Commission after negotiations with the Member State concerned.
At this stage, it is thus not possible for the Commission to assess the volume of investment which will
indirectly benefit the Games.

Checking the use made of the funds earmarked in the various operational programmes for sectors such as
the environment, culture and rural development is the responsibility of the Monitoring Committee for each
programme. However, within the limits of its competence in the matter, the Commission will be closely
following the way in which these programmes are implemented.

(2001/C 163 E/178)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3545/00

by Ursula Schleicher (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(15 November 2000)

Subject: Wine flasks

In the German media, especially in the German wine producing area of Franconia, a Commission proposal
is causing a considerable stir. From what I hear the Commission is about to remove the existing protection
for the traditional bulbous wine flasks used in Germany/Franconia, Portugal and northern Italy, in the
course of a review of existing legislation. Apparently the Management Committee for Wine is dealing with
the matter.

Is there any truth in these press reports (including Bild of 9 October 2000 and VWD (Economic

1.
News Agency) of 12 October 2000)?

2. Why does the Commission think it necessary to change the existing legislation and allegedly remove
the protection for specially protected bottle shapes?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(14 December 2000)

Following the adoption by the Council and Parliament of Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999 of 17 May 1999
on the common organisation of the market in wine (1), the Commission is required to adopt new
implementing rules on several subjects including the designation, presentation and protection of wine
sector products. These will have to take account of the new rules adopted at the time of the reform of the
market organisation, one of whose objectives is the simplification of Community legislation.

With regard to the press reports mentioned by the Honourable Member, the Commission wishes to point
out that, while it is true that the working paper distributed to the Management Committee for Wine does
not state that bottles of the (cid:145)Bocksbeutel(cid:146) type are reserved for certain wines from certain regions of the
Community, it is not true to say that the Community wants to abolish the exclusive right to use this type
of bottle. The question is rather whether it is necessary for this right to appear explicitly in the new
legislation.