WRITTEN QUESTION E-1332/01 by Arlindo Cunha (PPE-DE) to the Commission. New establishment plan for the Directorate-General for Fisheries.
Date: 2001-05-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU Member State, equal treatment, fisheries policy, fishing agreement, operation of the Institutions, organisation chart

C 93 E/8

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.4.2002

these posts was signed. All of a sudden the administrative board of the DEPAA by decision 1 of
12 January 2000 revoked the assessment board’s decision 88 of 18 December 1999 and by decision 3 of
15 January 2000 selected other candidates without denouncing the employment contracts concluded with
the candidates previously selected. Furthermore, by decision 246/2000 it partially accepted the appeal by
the injured parties, forcing the DEPAA to pay compensation.

In view of the above, will the Commission say:

1.

Is it aware of the above issue?

2. Are the decisions taken by the DEPAA compatible with Community law?

3. What actions does it intend to take to ensure that the programmes in question are implemented in a

more transparent manner?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(29 June 2001)

The Commission has asked the Greek authorities for information on the case to which the Honourable
Member refers.

It has emerged that this action was not financed by the European Social Fund after all and that the
Structural Fund regulation does not apply in this case.

Moreover, the assessment of applicants with a view to signing employment contracts, together with the
termination of such contracts, is a matter for national law, and it is up to the national courts and/or
administration to resolve all disputes arising from this case.

(2002/C 93 E/008)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1332/01

by Arlindo Cunha (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(3 May 2001)

Subject: New establishment plan for the Directorate-General for Fisheries

Information has been received to the effect
for Fisheries is currently
implementing a new establishment plan under which fisheries agreements with the countries of the North
Atlantic and northern Europe would be the responsibility of one Directorate, whilst fisheries agreements
with other third countries would be the responsibility of another.

the Directorate-General

that

If this is indeed the case, such a situation would be politically unsustainable since it would establish one set
of criteria for fisheries agreements involving the northern EU countries and another one for those
involving the southern EU countries. This would undermine the principle of equal treatment which should
apply to all EU fishermen and fisheries agreements.

Would the Commission say whether or not the above information is true? If it is, what discussions have
been held with organisations representing those who work in the fisheries sector and what is the basis for
the Commission’s decision?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(29 June 2001)

The new establishment plan for Directorate general
is not
intended to discriminate between southern and northern agreements. It is rather based on a policy or
activity approach with Directorate A handling Conservation policy (stocks and fleets, in particular) and

(DG) Fisheries adopted on 1 April 2001,

18.4.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 93 E/9

Directorate B covering external relations, with multilateral and bilateral arrangements being handled by
separate units.

There is no North/South divide and certainly no difference of treatment between various Member States.
The new establishment plan for DG Fisheries foresees that all agreements based on a financial payment for
the access to fishing grounds (such as Greenland, Mauritania, Angola and others) are dealt with in one unit
in Directorate B. This in fact guarantees that they are managed in a coherent way.

Iceland and others) are dealt with by the unit

Those agreements with third countries, where the exchange of fishing rights are the basic element (such as
in Directorate A that also deals with the
Norway,
management of stocks. This is useful as the fishing rights under these agreements are part of the TAC’s and
Quotas that have to be divided between Member States. Especially in the case of Norway the advantage of
this new system can be seen, as the Commission is currently negotiating with Norway the long term
technical measures for the recovery of the Cod stocks in the North Sea.

Dialogue with organisations in the fisheries sector takes place on a continuous basis through the work of
the Consultative Committee on Fisheries and Aquaculture. However, the internal organisation of its
services is a matter on which the Commission acts independently having regard to considerations of
efficient use of resources and smooth implementation of policy.

(2002/C 93 E/009)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1404/01

by Philip Bradbourn (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(11 May 2001)

Subject: Business impact assessment

Can the Commission identify which pieces of legislation have been subject to a business impact assessment
since it came into existence in 1986 and can they supply a summary of what effect such assessments have
had in relation to legislation?

How does the Commission see business impact assessments in relation to the proposals on European
Governance?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(22 October 2001)

The Commission is sorry to have to tell the Honorable Member that there is no centralised information on
this subject in the Commission, and that the research that would have to be done in order to provide a
detailed response to his question would be out of all proportion to the result desired, and would exceed
the requirements of a response to a written question.

As to the second part of the question, the Commission considers that the business impact assessment (BIA)
has since 1986 proven to be useful in assessing the impact of legislation on enterprises, and in particular
small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). However, in light of the recognised shortcomings and the
broader debate on governance and especially on regulatory simplification, the Commission launched a
pilot project for reviewing the existing BIA system in September 2000. It will run until February 2002,
with preliminary conclusions to be drawn in the autumn of 2001. The objective of the pilot project is
both to improve the existing system (with a particular focus on external consultation and economic
analysis) and to feed experiences into the broader debate initiated by the White Paper on European
Governance adopted by the Commission on 25 July 2001 (1).

(1) COM(2001) 428 final.