WRITTEN QUESTION P-1128/01 by Daniel Hannan (PPE-DE) to the Council. Lobbying for an EU superstate.
Date: 2001-04-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European integration, United States, financing

C 340 E/176

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

4.12.2001

4. Did these programmes comply, or are they complying, with the principles of political pluralism and

equal rights which RAI must observe?

5.

If not, since these principles have not been observed, and in view of RAI(cid:146)s role as a public utility, does
the Commission not believe that it should take appropriate action?

(2001/C 340 E/201)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1244/01

by Francesco Fiori (PPE-DE), Generoso Andria (PPE-DE),
Renato Brunetta (PPE-DE), Raffaele Costa (PPE-DE), Marcello Dell(cid:146)Utri (PPE-DE),
Giuseppe Gargani (PPE-DE), Giorgio Lisi (PPE-DE), Francesco Musotto (PPE-DE),
Giuseppe Nistic(cid:242) (PPE-DE), Guido Podest(cid:224) (PPE-DE), Amalia Sartori (PPE-DE)
and Stefano Zappal(cid:224) (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(26 April 2001)

Subject: RAI (Italian Radio and Television Company)

Would the Commission and its President answer the following questions:

(cid:129) in the course of its existence, has the Italian Radio and Television Company ever received any kind of

funding from the Commission?

(cid:129) has such funding been used for the purpose of broadcasting programmes or information bulletins?

(cid:129) have such programmes and bulletins been broadcast and, if so, when?

(cid:129) did such programmes and bulletins observe the principles which govern RAI

in its capacity as

a company responsible for providing a major public service?

(cid:129) if the principles which RAI is supposed to uphold have been contravened, should the Commission not

suspend any funding which it may be supplying?

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-1123/01 and E-1244/01
given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(5 June 2001)

The main Community programme in the audiovisual sector is the MEDIA Plus programme, which entered
into force on 1 January 2001. This programme follows on from the MEDIA and MEDIA II programmes,
which were implemented between 1991 and 2000.

For these programmes, Community funding is awarded solely to independent producers and distributors,
and the concept of independence is assessed in view of the tendering or receiving company(cid:146)s possible links
with a public or private broadcasting company.

Broadcasting companies, whether public or private, are not eligible for Community support under the
MEDIA programmes. RAI has not, therefore, received any Community funding in this area.

(2001/C 340 E/202)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1128/01

by Daniel Hannan (PPE-DE) to the Council

(3 April 2001)

Subject: Lobbying for an EU superstate

It has been alleged that the American Committee for a United Europe made US Administration funds
available to organisations campaigning for European integration.

In its answer to Written Question E-3127/00 (1), the Council failed to reply to part of the question relating
to its files. Will it now answer whether it is in possession of any documents relating to this issue?

4.12.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 340 E/177

Will it also now indicate whether ACUE or other intelligence-funded agencies or operations in pursuit of
closer European integration have ever been discussed at Council meetings?

Similarly, does the Council have any records relating to funding by non-member states of organisations
campaigning in the 1975 UK referendum on membership of the EEC? At what level of classification have
they been set up?

(1) OJ C 163 E, 6.6.2001, p. 39.

Reply

(16 July 2001)

Having nothing to add, the Council can only confirm the terms of its reply to the Honourable Member in
response to his Question E-3127/00.

Since the Council has never been apprised of nor had to discuss the allegations to which the Honourable
Member refers, it has no files on this subject of any type whatsoever.

(2001/C 340 E/203)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1129/01

by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission

(3 April 2001)

Subject:

(cid:145)Naming and shaming(cid:146) to achieve environmental policy implementation

The objective of the (cid:145)naming and shaming(cid:146) approach is to highlight failures by Member States to comply
with EU law and increase public pressure upon decisions-makers. The organisation by the Commission of
a seminar on the implementation of the Urban Waste Water Directive on 19 March is therefore to be
welcomed.

However, the credibility of the Commission(cid:146)s seminar was seriously undermined by the inclusion in its
press release of locations such as Bebington, Birkenhead and Liverpool, where waste water treatment plants
have recently been brought into use which ensure full compliance with the directive and have secured
major improvements in water quality, and of locations such as Macclesfield, where a treatment plant has
been in operation for many years but has apparently not been included on information supplied to the
Commission.

Will the Commission agree that to assume that a place is a source of pollution, solely on the basis that it
does not have the information to confirm that it is not,
is unacceptable, maligns the town or city
concerned and could result in damage to its reputation and image?

Will the Commission consider in the future giving one month(cid:146)s notice of a (cid:145)name and shame(cid:146) list to each
Member State, both to provide decision-makers with an opportunity to confirm the factual accuracy of the
information, and to allow them to prepare a public response which, insomuch as it is likely to indicate
is likely to encourage implementation of
action which will be taken to ensure future compliance,
directives?

Answer given by Mrs Wallstr(cid:246)m on behalf of the Commission

(8 May 2001)

The Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive, Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning
urban waste water (1) sets clear objectives in terms of deadlines and environmental objectives to achieve:

(cid:129) designation by the end of 1993 of sensitive areas according to criteria set out in the Directive;

(cid:129) by the end of 1998, tertiary treatment for all agglomerations above 10 000 population equivalent

(p.e.) (2) in the catchment of such sensitive areas;