WRITTEN QUESTION E-2822/01 by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Council. Gender mainstreaming in ACP countries.
Date: 2001-10-10
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: ACP countries, Commission Delegation, anti-discriminatory measure, cooperation policy, economic development, gender equality, vocational training

C 134 E/116

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

6.6.2002

All eligibility and selection criteria are explained in the guidelines to the calls for proposals which begin
the grant award procedures. The Commission fully respects this requirement, which is necessary to
guarantee total transparency and the equal treatment of applications. All procedures followed by the
Commission in the course of its work are in line with the rules in force.

The Commission has provided for an evaluation of the impact of actions and grants to organisations under
the programme. The committee was consulted in January 2001 on whether it would be appropriate to
begin an evaluation exercise focused on the impact of transnational actions for 2002-2004 which are
financed by the programme and on criteria for selecting the organisation to be assigned to this external
evaluation. More generally, all of the actions in the anti-discrimination programme will be evaluated, and
this question will certainly be included on the committee’s agenda in due course.

All of the organisations which submitted a grant application are informed of the final result no later than
six weeks after the deadline for submission. However, this information can be provided only once the
committee has agreed on the list of pre-selected actions or organisations. Those organisations wishing to
find out in greater detail why their applications were not accepted by the Commission are invited to do so.
Moreover, the Commission has on several occasions provided assistance to organisations which requested
it.

In conclusion, the Commission believes that the Member States’ representatives on the committee set up
under the programme to combat discrimination are involved and consulted in full accordance with the
provisions of the Decision establishing the programme,
in particular Articles 5 and 6, which refer to
Decision 1999/468/EC of 28 June 1999 laying down the procedures for the exercise of implementing
powers conferred on the Commission (3).

(1) OJ L 303, 2.12.2000.
(2) http://europa. eu. int/comm/employment_social/fundamri/prog/comite_en. htm.
(3) OJ L 184, 17.7.1999.

(2002/C 134 E/116)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2822/01

by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Council

(10 October 2001)

Subject: Gender mainstreaming in ACP countries

What plans does the Council have for working to ensure that trade policies promote human rights and
gender equality in ACP countries?

In the context of deconcentration, and the stated objective of mainstreaming gender in the EU’s
development cooperation with ACP countries, does the Council agree that at least one member of all
delegations in ACP countries should have expertise and responsibility for gender?

Reply

(12 February 2002)

1.
The Council Resolution of December 1995, the Council Conclusions of May 1998 and the Council
Regulation of December 1998 on Integrating Gender Issues in Development Co-operation set the policy
framework for EC Development cooperation and gender equality. For the ACP countries in addition,
gender issues are emphasised in the Cotonou Agreement as cross-cutting issues.

2.
Pursuant to these Resolutions and instruments the Council warmly welcomes the Commission
Communication on the Programme of Action for the mainstreaming of gender equality in Community
Development Co-operation.

6.6.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 134 E/117

With a view to further reinforcing the above framework, the agenda of the Council on 8 November 2001
envisages the adoption of Conclusions on the Commission’s Programme of Action. It notes that gender
aspects will be analysed and integrated within the priority areas contained in the EC Development Policy,
inter alia, support for macro-economic policies as well as trade and development (in particular to identify
mechanisms ensuring that trade and investments support gender equality).

3.
The Council is of the opinion that adequate human resources in terms of quantity, capacity and
continuity are crucial for a timely and effective implementation of this Programme of Action over the
coming years.

In this context the Council emphasises the need to include training on gender issues in all training
activities related to development cooperation and notes that the Commission’s internal gender main-
streaming capacities will be established through a number of methods (for instance training and the
development of tools).

While the Council supports the Commission’s plans for building its internal capacity, tools and methods
for gender mainstreaming,
the allocation of adequate human resources within
Commission delegations in ACP countries is the responsibility of the Commission.

it considers

that

(2002/C 134 E/117)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2824/01

by María Sornosa Martínez (PSE) to the Commission

(11 October 2001)

Subject: Failure to comply with Community legislation in the construction of the Spanish high-speed train

passing through Osera del Ebro

In December 1999 the mayor of the town of Osera del Ebro submitted a complaint (99/5330) to the
Commission on the grounds of an infringement of EU environmental legislation in the modified route for
the Zaragoza-Lleida stretch of the high-speed railway line which, if the current proposal goes ahead, would
seriously affect the natural area of Soto del Aguilar (hitherto protected).

In view of the fact that:

C Soto del Aguilar is home to species protected by the ‘wild birds’ Directive 79/409 (1) and the ‘habitats’
Directive 92/43 (2) and the Spanish authorities should therefore have included it as an ASPB and SCI
for the purposes of Natura 2000;

C there is a better alternative route (the ‘Northern alternative’) which would not cause any damage to the
environment, but, despite being the first route proposed, it was rejected by the Spanish Government
without any cogent reason being given for the change;

C the Directive on environmental impact assessment 85/337 (3) has not been correctly applied, since the
adverse opinion of the Ministry for the Environment was not taken into account and the project
finally accepted for the current route has serious shortcomings;

C the construction of

from the Cohesion Fund, although
Community funding should never be used to finance projects which do not respect the environment;

the high-speed train receives support

C according to information obtained by the questioner the Spanish Government would be willing to
alter the route once again, but this would only leave undamaged too small a part of the natural area,
which qualifies for continued protection.

Can the Commission say what stage has been reached in dealing with complaint 99/5330?