WRITTEN QUESTION E-1850/01 by Francisca Sauquillo Pérez del Arco (PSE) to the Commission. Refusal to fund the Algerian Watch web site.
Date: 2001-06-26
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Algeria, EU programme, Internet site, financial aid

11.12.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 350 E/233

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(16 July 2001)

The Member States which are Party to the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) are currently
negotiating, together with the Commission, an international Convention on harmful anti-fouling systems,
including tributyltin (TBT).
in the framework of the discussions on Commission Directive
1999/51/EC of 26 May 1999 adapting to technical progress for the fifth time Annex I to Council Directive
76/769/EEC on the approximations of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member
States relating to restrictions on the marketing and use of certain dangerous substances and preparations
(tin, PCP and cadmium) (1), the Member States and the Commission agreed to await the results of the
decision of IMO, to ban TBT globally before introducing a ban at Community level.

In 1999,

The Commission is fully supportive of a global ban by 1 January 2003 on the application of organotin
compounds which act as biocides in antifouling systems on ships as proposed by the Mar(cid:237)ne Environment
Protection Committee of the IMO. As negotiations stand, the future Convention to be considered in an
IMO Diplomatic Conference in October 2001, will probably call for a general ban on TBT which takes
effect on the proposed date.

Following the Diplomatic Conference, the Commission will immediately prepare a Commission Directive
adapting Council Directive 76/769/EEC of 27 July 1976 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and
administrative provisions of the Member States relating to restrictions on the marketing and use of
dangerous substances and preparations (2)
to technical progress. Such a Directive would follow the
Committee procedure and could be completed in three to six months. This would leave sufficient time
before 1 January 2003 for the Member States to transpose the provisions into national law.

(1) OJ L 142, 5.6.1999.
(2) OJ L 262, 27.9.1976.

(2001/C 350 E/264)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1850/01

by Francisca Sauquillo PØrez del Arco (PSE) to the Commission

Subject: Refusal to fund the (cid:145)Algerian Watch(cid:146) web site

(26 June 2001)

The Commission has refused to grant financial assistance to the (cid:145)Algerian Watch(cid:146) Internet portal on the
grounds that projects to be funded must be in line with the indicative programme in the areas and sectors
determined jointly in advance by the Commission and the Algerian Government.

Is it usually the case under the procedures for selecting projects or activities to be financed by the
Commission under the MEDA programme that the governments of the recipient countries sanction the
approval of and funding for projects?

Does the Commission consider the (cid:145)Algerian Watch(cid:146) web site to be suitable for Community funding
inasmuch as it helps to foster democracy, transparency, and pluralism in Algeria?

Has it been instructed by any Algerian or European authority, institution, or organisation not to finance
the web site?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(26 July 2001)

In Meda co-operation,
indicative
programme setting out the fields and sectors for Community assistance. All operations must therefore be
part of the overall programme agreed with the Algerian government.

the Commission and the partner government agree a three-year

C 350 E/234

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

11.12.2001

Algeria Watch(cid:146)s grant application concerns the development of the English-language version of its website.
The aim is to publish information on Algeria throughout Europe.

Nobody has instructed the Commission not to finance Algeria Watch(cid:146)s website.

(2001/C 350 E/265)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1886/01

by Rolf Berend (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(21 June 2001)

Subject: Town twinning programmes

Numerous municipalities and town twinning associations are currently receiving letters from Brussels
informing them that their applications have been rejected. A list of 22 possible reasons is appended, and
the relevant reason is marked with a cross. Often only a signature or bank form is missing, but this means
that the application is not even submitted to the selection panel for a decision.

Unlike in previous years, the Commission is not able to get back to the applicants concerned. Applications
which contain only a very small formal error are not forwarded to the selection panel.

This causes pro-Europe town twinning associations and municipalities a great deal of frustration, and, if
this is to be avoided, it is absolutely essential that the Commission gets back to the applicants in such cases
so that the omissions can be rectified.

What prospects does the Commission see for redeploying its staff so that the previous practice can be
resumed, so as not to put enthusiastic pro-Europeans off Europe?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(24 July 2001)

This year the Commission adopted the (cid:145)call for proposals(cid:146) procedure for funding town-twinning activities.
This had been discussed and agreed with the national and regional organisations involved in town
twinning. The idea was to resolve the problems that had regularly occurred in the past (e.g. processing
delays) and bring the management of this type of funding into line with the rules generally applied at
Community level for the awarding of grants.

This procedure requires the submission of complete dossiers including various annexes which are clearly
specified in the call for proposals, by a date which is known in advance. The aim is to improve the
administration of dossiers, of which more than 2 500 are submitted each year, in the interest of applicants
(quicker processing and prompt payments).

In order to launch the new system under the best possible conditions, staff have already been redeployed
to the extent allowed by the available resources. A return to the previous practice would mean a return to
long processing times for all grant applications.

The Commission has arranged a meeting with the above-mentioned organisations and the European
Parliament in autumn 2001 to take stock of the situation and examine any simplification possibilities
compatible with the rules of sound administrative and financial practice.