WRITTEN QUESTION E-1613/01 by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Malta and the directive on wild birds.
Date: 2001-06-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Malta, bird, environmental protection, transitional period (EU)

18.4.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 93 E/15

(2002/C 93 E/017)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1611/01

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

Subject: Financial aid to the European Movement in Malta

(1 June 2001)

How much has the European Union paid in financial aid to date to the European Movement in Malta and
what support is planned for the European Movement in the future in terms of financial and other
resources?

(2002/C 93 E/018)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1612/01

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(1 June 2001)

Subject: Funding of EU campaigns in Malta

What does the Commission plan to do to persuade the citizens of Malta that Malta’s membership of the
EU is a desirable aim? The Commission has reportedly dispatched staff to Malta to conduct a pro-EU
campaign there.

Will the Commission say what financial and human resources have been set aside for this year and future
years for EU information in Malta?

(2002/C 93 E/019)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1613/01

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(1 June 2001)

Subject: Malta and the directive on wild birds

Does the Commission intend to grant Malta an exemption from the directive on wild birds should that
country become a Member State of the Union, or are transitional periods under discussion to allow Malta
to comply with that directive?

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-1610/01, E-1611/01, E-1612/01 and E-1613/01
given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(27 July 2001)

It is for the Maltese authorities to adopt a position on Maltese becoming an official language; this matter
will be dealt with at the end of the negotiations under the ‘institutions’ chapter. Any candidate country
wanting its national
language of the European Union is under the
obligation to translate the acquis communautaire into that language, using its own resources. In that case
the Commission can give technical assistance to help these countries set up the framework needed to carry
out the work. Without prejudging its final position on the matter, Malta has informed the Commission
that it has started translating the acquis communautaire into Maltese.

language to become an official

To date the EU has not given any grants to the European Movement in Malta, nor has it any plans to
finance or otherwise back this Movement.

C 93 E/16

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.4.2002

The aim of the Commission is not to try to convince the Maltese people of the advantages of EU
membership. The Commission considers that it is for the Maltese people to decide on the issue. To help
them do so the Commission adopted in May 2000 a communication strategy on enlargement which
includes Malta along with the other applicant countries.

The strategy has three aims:

> to improve the understanding of the EU;

> to explain the implications of membership;

> to explain the link between preparing for accession and making progress in the negotiations.

With this strategy, the Commission aims to give ongoing objective information to the Maltese people and
to the citizens of other applicant countries. The Commission is thereby responding to a demand from
Maltese civil society and Maltese citizens who want to be correctly informed in order to make the right
decision on the question of EU membership. EUR 1 million will be available until 2004, of which EUR
200 000 will be spent this year and EUR 300 000 in 2002.

To date one Local Technical Assistance Staff (ALAT) member has been recruited at the EU delegation in
Malta and another is due to be taken on. This extra staff will be mainly concerned with managing the pre-
accession aid package (EUR 38 million for 2000-2004) and monitoring Malta’s progress in implementing
the acquis communautaire.

Negotiations on the environment have just started with Malta and at this stage the Commission is not in a
position to prejudge their outcome.

(2002/C 93 E/020)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1634/01

by Rosa Miguélez Ramos (PSE) to the Commission

(12 June 2001)

Subject: Execution of Commission initiatives over the period 1994-1999

The Community initiatives created in 1989 enable the Commission to play a more active role, on the
supposition that
the Member States. The
Commission has, in these Community initiatives, a leading role in dealing with specific problems affecting
the EU as a whole.

it has an overall vision allegedly lacking at

the level of

Over the programming period 1994-1999 13 initiatives were adopted, with a total budget of EUR 13 450
m. These initiatives were characterised by a ‘value added’ element vis-à-vis the other measures financed by
the Structural Funds, since they were aimed at encouraging transnational, crossborder and interregional
cooperation, the participation of local economic and social agents, and aid to real cooperation among all
interested parties.

In view of all the above, the Commission and the Member States may logically be expected to have made
efforts to execute, in their entirety, the resources allocated to each of the 13 initiatives for the period
1994-1999.

Can the Commission state the real execution level of the appropriations earmarked for this set of initiatives
over the period 1994-1999?

What was the real execution level for each of the initiatives (Interreg II, Leader II, REGIS II, NOW, Horizon,
Youthstart, Integra, ADAPT, Rechar II, Resider II, Konver, RETEX, SME, URBAN and PESCA)?

What is the Commission’s assessment of the execution percentage? Why were the remaining funds
earmarked for each initiative not executed?