WRITTEN QUESTION E-2781/01 by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Commission. New security measures at airports.
Date: 2001-10-09
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: air safety, airport, civil aviation, public safety, terrorism, transport safety

16.5.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 115 E/157

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(20 November 2001)

In accordance with Article 11 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down
general provisions on the Structural Funds (1), the main rationale for the additionality principle is that
Structural Funds should not replace public or other equivalent expenditure incurred by a Member State. In
order to verify this additionality, assessments are carried out in three phases: ex-ante, mid-term and ex-
post.

The Commission and the Finnish authorities have agreed on the level of public expenditure, which is to be
maintained over the 2000-2006 period for the objective 1 areas. Compared to the previous period (1995-
1999),
this represents an increase of 0,7 % on the annual average. This estimate is based on the
assumption that municipal and state income is expected to grow annually by 2 % on average, and that the
expenditure incurred by state-owned companies is not included in the calculation.

Throughout the programming period, the Finnish authorities will inform the Commission, in due course,
of any developments which may undermine their ability to comply with additionality.

A further verification of this principle will then be undertaken at the mid-term phase in accordance with
the above mentioned Council Regulation.

(1) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.

(2002/C 115 E/163)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2781/01

by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Commission

(9 October 2001)

Subject: New security measures at airports

The tragic spread of terrorism has prompted the adoption of new measures to ensure security at airports.
These include preventing passengers from going through security controls with nail scissors, penknives or
any sharp objects and taking them on flights.

Is the Commission aware that airport shops in departure lounges display nail scissors, penknives etc.,

1.
which can be purchased freely and taken on board?

2.

Does the Commission intend to take any action on this subject?

Does the Commission consider that

3.
communication on the part of those responsible for security measures?

this omission is due to yet another example of

lack of

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(14 November 2001)

The Commission unreservedly condemns such practices and indeed has recommended that the sale of such
dangerous objects should be stopped.

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 be based on the rules set out in Document 30 of the European Civil Aviation
Conference (ECAC) and will aim at increased control of both international and domestic flights.

C 115 E/158

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

16.5.2002

They will chiefly be concerned with:

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

: control of passengers and their hand luggage;

: control and monitoring of hold luggage;

: control of cargo and mail;

: training of ground staff;

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

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

sensitive areas of airports.

The issue is currently a matter for national aviation security authorities. The Commission has been
informed that national authorities have acted to prohibit the sale of such objects beyond the security
control check points.

(1) COM(2001) 575 final.

(2002/C 115 E/164)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2790/01

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

Subject: Air transport problems and Olympic Airways

(9 October 2001)

Following the terrorist attack in the USA and the Bush Administration’s decision to grant the country’s
airlines $15 billion in aid, a growing number of governments worldwide are deciding to assist their air
carriers to overcome the immediate problems of soaring insurance premiums and the projected slump in
traffic.

1. What measures will the Commission take to bolster small European air carriers to enable them to
survive in the new international environment which calls for additional outlay on insurance? Is it
considering the possibility of using state aid to cover the extra expenditure incurred?

2.
Has the situation of the smaller airlines, such as Olympic Airways, been taken into consideration,
given the danger of their being snapped up at bargain prices by non-viable buyers? Will the Commission
recommend the postponement of all privatisation processes until
the turbulent situation in the air
transport industry has calmed down?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(3 December 2001)

Following the terrorist attacks in the United States on 11 September 2001, the Commission adopted a
Communication (1) on 10 October 2001 on the repercussions of these events on the air transport industry
in Europe. In view of the magnitude of the crisis, the Commission considered the adoption of certain
emergency measures for a temporary period to deal with the exceptional circumstances in which the
industry finds itself since the 11 September 2001.

In particular, the Commission announced that measures taken by Member States in the current context
constituted state aid and that they would have therefore to be duly notified to the Commission. It further
announced that it would give favourable consideration to measures to compensate airlines for losses
resulting directly from the four-day closure of American airspace; that it would examine the assumption by
Member States of the additional costs of insurance for a maximum period of one month and the