WRITTEN QUESTION E-1133/01 by Nirj Deva (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Zimbabwe.
Date: 2001-04-10
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Red Cross, Zimbabwe, political violence, president of an institution

C 340 E/178

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

4.12.2001

(cid:129) by the end of 2000, secondary treatment for all agglomerations above 15 000 population equivalents

in the catchment (cid:145)normal(cid:146) areas (i.e. such waters not identified as sensitive);

(cid:129) by the end of 2005, secondary treatment for all remaining agglomerations within the scope of the

Directive.

The Commission will shortly publish its second report for the implementation of Council Directive
91/271/EEC, showing the state of play regarding the second deadline, i.e. 31 December 1998. It is in this
context that the (cid:145)name and shame(cid:146) seminar was organised. The Commission wanted to address in particular
the following two issues: compliance in designating sensitive areas, and secondly and linked to the first,
compliance with the 1998 deadline for discharges into sensitive areas.

For the sensitive areas, the Commission came to the conclusion that the United Kingdom, as is the case
with other Member States, has not provided a complete designation of sensitive areas. This has in many
cases led to a lower level of treatment (secondary treatment instead of tertiary treatment,
involving
nitrogen removal, for discharges into waters meeting the eutrophication criteria or disinfection in case of
certain bathing waters).

Apart from evaluating the situation with regard to conformity for agglomerations concerned by sensitive
areas on December 1998, the Commission wished to provide a (cid:145)snapshot(cid:146) of the level of treatment of
urban waste water in all large Community cities (above 150 000 p.e.) on 31 December 1998. With regard
to the level of treatment provided in major cities and towns, one has to bear in mind that the Commission
relies on the information provided by Member States. If no information is provided, the Commission can
only conclude that no treatment has been put in place.

As far as the United Kingdom is concerned, on the situation of the main cities at 31 December 1998,
Liverpool was provided with primary treatment, Bedington had preliminary treatment and there is no
information about the level of treatment in Birkenhead and Macclesfield.

The draft of the second implementation report was sent to the Member Sates on the 13 March 2001. It
has to be noted, however, that any new information that is provided by the Member States after the
31 January 2001 can only and will be taken into account for the third implementation report, which will
reflect the situation for the third deadline of the directive, 31 December 2000 (see above).

In summary, the Commission considers that the implementation of the Urban Waste Water Directive,
although considerable efforts have been made by certain Member States,
is behind schedule and
incomplete, both as regards compliance with the necessary treatment objective and deadlines.

(1) OJ L 135, 30.5.1991.
(2) Population equivalent means the organic biodegradable load having a five-day chemical oxygen demand (BOD5) of

60 g of oxygen per day.

(2001/C 340 E/204)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1133/01

by Nirj Deva (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(10 April 2001)

Subject: Zimbabwe

Is it correct that the chairman of the Zimbabwean Red Cross is Dr Swithum Mombeshora who is also the
Zanu/PF Minister of Energy in Mugabe(cid:146)s Government?

4.12.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 340 E/179

Is it also correct that there are Red Cross structures throughout Zimbabwe such as in Mberenqua East,
which have as their acting chairman Mr Shiri, a teacher at Zuishava in Mberenqua East, a perpetrator of
violence against MDC members, who was also arrested and charged, but is now a beneficiary of the
Mugabe amnesty and is once again agitating for violence in preparation for the forthcoming Presidential
election?

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(31 May 2001)

Swithun Mombeshora is Minister of Transport and Chairman of the Zimbabwe Red Cross.

Mr Shiri is Deputy Headmaster of a secondary school in Mberengwa District. He was taken into custody by
police in connection with political violence carried out on behalf of the ruling party in Mberengwa in the
pre-election period, but was soon released and there has been no follow-up. Mr Shiri was on the
Mberengwa Committee of the Zimbabwe Red Cross. This Committee has been dissolved pending elections.

It is not the role of the Commission to judge individual nominations made at local and national levels by
the Zimbabwe Red Cross. I would suggest your queries are directed to the International Federation of Red
Cross and Red Crescent Societies.

(2001/C 340 E/205)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1146/01

by Laura GonzÆlez `lvarez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(10 April 2001)

Subject: Environmental aggression on the island of Lanzarote (Canaries, Spain)

Unesco has declared the island of Lanzarote, in the Canaries archipelago, a biosphere reserve. Action by
the Canaries artist CØsar Manrique helped to preserve the island from attacks on its natural, landscape and
archaeological assets. Now, however, strong pressure from tourism is threatening to eliminate areas of
special ecological and cultural value.

The construction of (cid:145)Mar(cid:237)na del Rubic(cid:243)n(cid:146), a marina in the bay of Berrugo (Playa Blanca), has already
destroyed a part of an area of great natural and ethnographic value in the Lanzarote local authority of
Yaiza. The intertidal zone has a base of low sand and ridges, forming a perfect ecosystem for fish to lay
their eggs and feed, but thousands of tons of stone and gravel have already been deposited there, blocking
up the small beach via which small local boats used to go out to fish. Archaeological and historical
remains are also affected.

What action can the Commission take to ensure compliance with Directives 85/337/EEC (1) and 92/43/
EEC (2) on environmental impact assessments and the protection of natural habitats in this case?

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40.
(2) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.

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

(14 June 2001)

The Commission was unaware of the situation the Honourable Member refers to in her Written Question.

On the basis of the information received from the Honourable Member, the Commission has ascertained
that the area of the island of Lanzarote where the marina in question is to be built has not been classified
by the Spanish authorities as a special protection area for birds under Article 4 of Council Directive