WRITTEN QUESTION P-1085/01 by Olle Schmidt (ELDR) to the Commission. Aid for the victims of hurricane Mitch.
Date: 2001-03-26
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: ECHO, EU aid, EU financing, EU programme, Honduras, aid policy, cyclone, emergency aid, humanitarian aid, operation of the Institutions

13.11.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 318 E/197

(2001/C 318 E/215)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1085/01

by Olle Schmidt (ELDR) to the Commission

(26 March 2001)

Subject: Aid for the victims of hurricane Mitch

In response to the devastation of large areas of Honduras and the death of tens of thousands of people
caused by hurricane Mitch, the EU promised aid of SEK 2,2 billion towards reconstruction.

More than two years after the disaster, however, it appears that only a tenth of that amount has reached
the victims of the hurricane. While other countries have completed their projects, not even one tenth of
the EU(cid:146)s billions has arrived. The remaining funds appear to be held up in Brussels.

How will the Commission(cid:146)s procedures be changed in order to avoid such a mistake in the event of future
disasters?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(8 May 2001)

As a rapid response to the most urgent needs due to Hurricane Mitch, the European Community(cid:146)s
Humanitarian Office (ECHO) gave to Honduras € 17,2 million of emergency relief between 1998 and
2000. Aid for food security in the region totalled € 30 million in 1999, the majority of which was
committed to Honduras. Food aid and ECHO aid committed to Honduras have already been disbursed.

the Community is contributing to the
In addition to the large amount of emergency assistance,
reconstruction and transformation programme of the Central American countries affected by Hurricane
Mitch. This is a longer term effort which has been thoroughly prepared and co-ordinated with the national
development strategies and other donors(cid:146) activities. In this framework, the Commission is implementing
the (cid:145)Regional Programme for Reconstruction of Central America(cid:146) (PRRAC). The programme covers public
health, water and sanitation, housing, education and training in the four beneficiary countries (El Salvador,
Nicaragua, Honduras and Guatemala).
financial
commitment for the PRRAC, amounting to € 82,5 million and on 22 December 2000, the Commission
committed the second part of the PRRAC for a total amount of € 44 160 million of which approximately
€ 22 million are devoted to Honduras. Of the total amount € 2 781 million has been spent.

In December 1999 the Commission made the first

The PRRAC has already committed € 52,7 million via its (cid:145)Subprograma Honduras(cid:146) to this country, which is
being implemented during the period 2000-2007. The first financial agreement between the Community
and Honduras was signed on 28 July 2000 for an amount of € 30 026 million. Based on this agreement
the Commission has signed, in 7 December 2000, contracts for a total amount of € 3 965 848 and so far
has spent € 918 000.

In the next two months the signature of the technical assistance contract for the management of € 26
million is foreseen, and two calls of interest for a total amount projects of € 49,9 million have been
published. From this amount, the signature of a contract for € 26,7 million at the end of 2001 is foreseen.

In addition to the above programmes, the Community will contribute around € 15 million for Honduras
within the framework of the Highly Indebted Poor Country (HIPC) initiative. This will be disbursed when
the International Monetary Fund (IMF) decides that Honduras has fulfilled the necessary conditions.

On 16 May 2000, the Commission adopted the Communication on the reform of the management of
external assistance (1) which identifies an ambitious programme of measures
to make significant
improvements in the quality and timely delivery of aid while ensuring robust financial management and
increased impact of Community external assistance.

These measures include a radical improvement in the programming of external assistance; the reunification
of the project cycle in the newly-created EuropeAid Co-operation Office; the streamlining of procedures

C 318 E/198

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

13.11.2001

and comitology practices; and the deconcentration of responsibilities to the Commission(cid:146)s Delegations. The
Commission(cid:146)s Delegation in Nicaragua, which is responsible for the PRRAC, is one of the 23 priority
Delegations to be included in the first wave of deconcentration in 2001. The reform is now under active
implementation. The Commission believes that, once completed, these measures will make a significant
improvement in the quality and timely delivery of the Commission(cid:146)s external assistance.

The Commission will present soon a Communication on the issue of linking relief, rehabilitation and
development which recognises the complexities of the problems and identifies a range of measures that
could improve the Community(cid:146)s record, in particular:

(cid:129) to facilitate co-ordination on a more systematic basis;

(cid:129) to reduce time delays, mobilise adequate resources in a timely fashion, and ensure the involvement of

appropriate partners.

(1) SEC(2000) 814.

(2001/C 318 E/216)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1086/01

by Joost Lagendijk (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(26 March 2001)

Subject: Slovenia(cid:146)s free-trade agreements with Croatia, FYROM and Bosnia

In the context of the negotiations on Slovenia(cid:146)s accession to the EU, the EU has asked that country to drop
its free-trade agreements with Croatia, FYROM and Bosnia in order to comply with the obligations of EU
membership. Free-trade agreements with countries which do not belong to the EU would give Slovenian
companies a competitive advantage over undertakings in other EU countries. This would affect the
operation of the common agricultural policy, the implementation of the Common Customs Tariff and the
free movement of goods within the internal market.

Does the Commission agree that free trade between Slovenia and Croatia, FYROM and Bosnia would
enhance regional cooperation, which is vital to peace and stabilty in the Balkans and will contribute to
further economic development of all the countries involved?

Is it true that transitional periods in respect of the free-trade agreements of a new European Union
Member State with a non-Member State have been granted in the past?

Does the Commission support the view that the free-trade agreements between Slovenia and Croatia,
FYROM and Bosnia can be brought in line with the trade liberalisation measures envisaged for the
countries of South-east Europe in the framework of the stabilisation and association processes?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(7 May 2001)

The Commission confirms that any arrangement allowing Slovenia to maintain separate trade agreements
with third countries after accession to the Union would disrupt the functioning of several key Community
policies, notably the Common Commercial Policy, the Common Agriculture Policy and the Customs
Union. It would also be incompatible with the operation of the single market without internal borders. It
would also provide Slovenian companies with an unfair competitive advantage over other Community
undertakings,
Former
trade
Yugoslavia Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) are based on different principles than those followed under
the Union(cid:146)s Stabilisation and Association Process, resulting in better access to these markets for Slovenian
products than those enjoyed by Community products.

agreements with Croatia

Slovenia(cid:146)s

and the

current

since

free

No transitional arrangement has ever been granted to any acceding State that would allow it to maintain
a bilateral free trade agreement with a third country.