WRITTEN QUESTION E-2238/01 by Caroline Lucas (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. EU relations with Colombia/EU assistance programme to support the peace process.
Date: 2001-07-26
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Colombia, EU control, cooperation policy, establishment of peace, fund (EU), human rights, paramilitary force, the EU's international role, use of aid

18.4.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 93 E/85

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(5 September 2001)

The Commission recently funded an experts’ mission to Burma/Myanmar to assess, in co-operation with
the United Nations/World health organisation (UN/WHO) AIDS programme, the human immunodeficiency
virus/acquired immune deficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS) infection profile in the country. Once the final
report of the mission has been received, the Commission will be in a position to consider how, and to
what extent, it can contribute funding to alleviate the crisis.

The Commission is well aware of the political aspects which may affect the way in which such funds are
channelled. This matter will be discussed in the framework of the Union’s Common Foreign and Security
Policy and any funding decision will be taken in full compliance with the terms of the Union’s Common
Position on Burma/Myanmar (1).

(1) No. 96/635/CFSP, OJ L 287, 8.11.1996.

(2002/C 93 E/104)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2238/01

by Caroline Lucas (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(26 July 2001)

Subject: EU relations with Colombia/EU assistance programme to support the peace process

The Commission has been asked in the past to guarantee that EU assistance remains wholly separate from
Plan Colombia. Yet we are concerned that European funds could be channelled through the ‘Fondo de
Inversiones para la Paz’, which is the Plan Colombia fund. Could the Commission explain how the
European funds are channelled and what criteria were established to guarantee transparency and
participation of local people and non-governmental sectors in the design, implementation and monitoring
of the projects?

Further, when will the EU present the first public report to the European Parliament on its six- monthly
appraisal of the peace process, will that report include an independent evaluation of the Colombian
Government’s human rights performance, with particular regard to the measures taken to combat
paramilitarism and its financial supporters?

Several reports show that aerial fumigation through US military aid causes severe human rights violations
such as forced displacement and damage to the health and environment of the people affected. Given its
responsibility to help protect human rights worldwide, how is the EU going to orientate its political
dialogue with the United States on the issue that the Colombian Government does not meet the human
rights conditions required if it is to receive military aid?

With regard to the strengthening of civil society participation, one of the priorities in the EU assistance
package, what mechanisms will be set up to guarantee a fluent dialogue between the Commission and
Council and the Colombian and European non-governmental sector? What will be done to improve the
exchange of information with the non-governmental sector?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(7 September 2001)

The Commission reiterates its intention to provide assistance to the Colombian peace process, which
should not be confused with so-called Plan Colombia.

The Commission is currently finalising a financial proposal concerning the first programme of the
Community aid package to Colombia. This proposal will be submitted shortly to Member States for
approval. The Commission intends to designate the Agencia Colombiana de Cooperación internacional
(ACCI) as its counterpart, as foreseen in the framework financial agreement signed in December 2000
between the Community and the Colombian Government. The Commission confirms therefore, that it
does not intend to channel the funds through the ‘Fondo de Inversiones para la Paz’.

C 93 E/86

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.4.2002

The Commission has identified, following the suggestion of Member States, the ‘Corporación de Desarrollo
y Paz del Magdalena Medio’, a well respected local non-governmental organisation, as the main executing
body of the project. This organisation has been involved in the design of the project.

For the monitoring of the projects, the Commission will apply the regular monitoring system employed in
the external co-operation of the Community.

(2002/C 93 E/105)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2246/01

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(26 July 2001)

Subject: Limited use of harbour waste collection facilities as a result of continuing dumping of ship’s waste

at sea

1.
Can the Commission confirm the claim made in the annual report of the Dutch group of waste
companies Holding AVR that of the approximately 30 000 ocean-going vessels berthing at the port of
Rotterdam each year only 7 % deliver household waste to the Watco or AVR facilities?

Can the Commission also confirm the claim made in this annual report that only 1 % of the water/oil

2.
mixture from engine rooms and only 3 % of fuel oil residues are delivered to these installations?

3.
Does the Commission share my fear that these figures for Rotterdam are extremely worrying as they
generally concern very large ships that put in at only one main port per continent and it is therefore not
possible for them to have delivered their waste earlier at a neighbouring harbour?

Does the Commission share my assumption that waste which is not delivered ends up in the sea? If

4.
not, where does it end up?

5. What is the Commission’s assessment of the chances of economic survival of port waste collection
facilities if they are being used to a limited extent because a large proportion of the expected waste is
being dumped at sea?

6. What changes does the Commission expect in this area in the coming years, not least as a result of
the conciliation concluded in September 2000 between the Council and Parliament on ship-generated
waste and cargo residues?

On the basis of the measures laid down on that occasion, how long does the Commission anticipate

7.
it will take before 100 % of waste is delivered to port reception facilities?

In the Commission’s opinion, what further measures are required to achieve the targeted 100 %

8.
delivery speedily in practice?

Source: Rotterdams Dagblad of 7.7.2001.

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(23 October 2001)

Obtaining exact data on the extent of waste disposal by ships is complicated by the absence of reliable
information on on-board waste management while ships are at sea. According to the Commission’s
information, which corresponds to that quoted by the Honourable Member, only a minor proportion of
the estimated total waste generated by ships is delivered ashore. Some discharges of waste into the sea are
permitted under the Marpol 73/78 Convention (International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution
from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978 relating thereto (MARPOL 73/78)), depending on
the rate and quantities of discharge as well as on the type of waste and the location of the ship. However,
it must be assumed that a considerable amount of the ‘missing’ ship-generated waste and cargo residues
enter the seas by means of illegal discharges.