WRITTEN QUESTION E-2664/01 by Sérgio Marques (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Objective 1 programmes.
Date: 2001-10-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EC Regulation, EU programme, Structural Funds, application of EU law, management, regional development, structural policy

18.4.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 93 E/173

(2002/C 93 E/207)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2664/01

by Sérgio Marques (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(1 October 2001)

Subject: Objective 1 programmes

On 5 July 2001 the Commission adopted a communication on the quality of regional development
programmes under Objective 1 for the period 2000-2006. The communication, which was presented to
the informal Council
in Namur, gives a broadly positive assessment whilst noting the existence of a
number of difficulties.

The main problems include the excessive time taken on average for programmes to be adopted, the failure
to lay down more efficient implementing rules at national level, shortcomings as regards taking account of
the importance of the ‘competitive philosophy’ in the performance reserve in certain Member States and,
finally, disparities in the Member States’ application of the new rules on the effective involvement of
regional and social partners and civil society.

Bearing in mind that the success of structural policies directly depends on the effective and coherent
implementation of programmes under the structural funds, what mechanisms will the Commission put in
place to remedy the shortcomings found, and what factors does it consider to be at the origin of these
shortcomings?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(19 November 2001)

The Commission’s communication of 5 July 2001 ‘The results of the programming of the Structural Funds
for 2000-2006 (Objective 1)’ (1) includes the main points about Community assistance programmed under
this Objective, with particular attention to the outcome of the negotiations with the Member States and
the value added by the Community. This takes the form of better quality plans with strategic shifts which
are sometimes significant. Although the outcome of
the
Commission mentioned and identified some difficulties encountered during this exercise.

these negotiations was generally positive,

For example, where there were some delays in adopting programmes, the Commission believes there is a
balance to be struck between the length of negotiations and the quality of the results, particularly in areas
such as the introduction of adequate management and surveillance systems, the inclusion of evaluation
before programming and broad consultations within the partnership and checks on compliance with
Community policies, particularly those concerning the environment and competition. The Commission
the Member States respected their
announced in the communication that
commitments in this regard.

it would ensure that

The communication includes two main messages:

7 Since the entry into force of Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 laying down general provisions
on the Structural Funds (2), the Commission has adopted a very wide range of provisions to deal with
various difficulties which could arise. These include two Regulations laying down detailed rules for the
implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 as regards the management and control
systems for assistance granted under the Structural Funds (3) and as regards the procedure for making
financial corrections to assistance granted under the Structural Funds (4). The Commission invites the
Member States to make greater efforts in these fields which are vital to ensure more efficient use of
the Structural Funds,
in accordance with the new implementing Regulations, and in particular
computer management systems to avoid delays in interim payments. The Commission intends to
make a comparative analysis of financial management and surveillance systems which will permit
identification of best practice and promote new solutions to problems arising in this area.

7 The Commission will ensure the sound operation of the partnership, which should be as broad as
possible, but also more proactive and responsible in terms of the actual management of assistance.

C 93 E/174

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.4.2002

The Third Report on Economic and Social Cohesion, which should be presented at the beginning of 2004,
will provide an occasion to look at the statutory improvements which need to be made to the operation of
the Structural Funds in the 2007-13 programming period. Between now and 2004, the Commission, in
liaison with national experts, the regions, associations, etc., will continue to reflect in detail on a number
of topics concerning the future of cohesion policy. This will include a review of the system for managing
the Funds with a view to its simplification.

(1) COM(2001) 378 final.
(2) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.
(3) Commission Regulation (EC) No 438/2001 (OJ L 63, 3.3.2001).
(4) Commission Regulation (EC) No 448/2001 (OJ L 64, 6.3.2001).

(2002/C 93 E/208)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2665/01

by Brice Hortefeux (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(21 September 2001)

Subject: Air transport safety

The recent terrorist attacks in the United States, which are likely to have repercussions in Europe, are a
reminder of the urgent need to deal with the issue of air safety.

This is an extremely complex issue, particularly in view of the fact that the European Union only has very
limited jurisdiction in this area (luggage checks are one of the few aspects under its responsibility). Air
safety mostly comes under the responsibility of the Member States.

In view of the above:

1. Does the Commission intend to prepare a ‘catalogue’ of specific measures which could serve as a

starting point for the Member States?

2. Does it intend to speed up the project to set up a single air traffic control system in Europe, which

would make integrated management of its airspace possible?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(5 November 2001)

It is true that to date responsibility for aviation security has been mainly vested in the National Authorities
and regulated in conformity with international standards, requirements and recommended best practices,
even if some aspects of Community law address that question indirectly. The events of 11 September 2001
show that Member States now all face the same terrorist threat and must therefore formulate a collective
response based on common preventative measures.

The Commission on 10 October 2001 proposed the adoption and enforcement of common Community
security rules for civil aviation by means of a Parliament and Council Regulation (1). The incorporation of
these rules into Community law will enable them to be applied in an effective manner and this process will
be subject to continuous control.

The common rules will cover:

7 control of access to sensitive areas of airports and aircraft;

7 control of passengers and their hand luggage;

7 control and monitoring of hold luggage;

7 control of cargo and mail;

7 training of ground staff;

7 definition of specifications for the equipment for the above controls;

7 classification of weapons and others items which it is prohibited to bring on to aircraft or into the

sensitive areas of airports;