WRITTEN QUESTION E-2862/01 by Vincenzo Lavarra (PSE) to the Commission. Requested extension of the deadline for Pesca and FIFG projects.
Date: 2001-10-17
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU financing, EU programme, Italy, deadline for payment, fishing industry, management

18.4.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 93 E/205

Given the importance of tourism in the European Union (it is the most job-creative sector, accounting for
13.5 % of GDP and directly employing 9 million people) and the grave situation which has developed since
the terrorist attack on 11 September, does the Commission have data available concerning the medium-
term impact of the crisis on tourism in the Union or the Member States? Does it intend to take any action?
Does it propose to reformulate the Philoxenia programme?

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-2861/01 and P-3025/01
given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(5 December 2001)

On 13 November 2001, the Commission adopted a report entitled ‘Follow-up of the European Council of
21 September: the situation in the European tourism sector’ (1) which deals with the impact of the
11 September 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States on European tourism in particular.

In this report the Commission emphasises that some of the measures proposed in its communication of
10 October 2001 on ‘the Repercussions of the terrorist attacks in the United States on the air transport
industry’ (2) also respond to requests made by the European tourism industry. It further comes to the
conclusion that the challenge will be to develop a strategy for the European tourism sector that meets the
medium and long-term political and economic challenges ahead.

Such strategy that also corresponds to the requests from the European tourism industry stakeholders for
integration and cooperation should be met by the new cooperative approach for the tourism industry set
out in the Commission communication of 13 November 2001 entitled ‘Working together for the future of
European tourism’ (3). The measures favoured under this approach aim at improving the integration of the
concerns of all tourism stakeholders in Community policies and initiatives affecting tourism, and at
promoting a better interface with the tourism industry and other parties involved. This approach does,
however, not mean to reformulate the former proposal for a multiannual programme to assist European
tourism (‘Philoxenia’).

Since uncertainty remains, the Commission will continue to monitor the impact of current events on
tourism and keep it under review. This will be done in cooperation with the Member States, the tourism
industry, and the other stakeholders. But, despite the immediate crisis situation with which specific market
segments, sectors and destinations are faced, measures which harm the long-term prospects for growth and
competitiveness of the European tourism industry should be avoided.

(1) COM(2001) 668 final.
(2) COM(2001) 574 final.
(3) COM(2001) 665 final.

(2002/C 93 E/244)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2862/01

by Vincenzo Lavarra (PSE) to the Commission

(17 October 2001)

Subject: Requested extension of the deadline for Pesca and FIFG projects

31 December 2001 was set as the deadline for the implementation of projects carried out under the
Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance 1994-1999 and the Pesca Community initiative. In this context
three national consortia (Uniprom, Unicredito and Unimar) were set up in Italy cofinanced by the FIFG, as
well as a number of service centres cofinanced by the Pesca initiative. Fishermen’s organisations promote
them and all fishermen are the ultimate beneficiaries.

C 93 E/206

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.4.2002

The specific nature of these consortia initially created a number of problems in connection with the
procedures to be adopted, the eligible expenditure, the guarantees to be provided, the documentation to be
produced and the accounting implications, all of which had repercussions on the execution of projects,
delaying their launch by approximately two years. Only later did the consortia and the service centres start
to operate actively, which was welcomed by the broadest possible consensus in the sector.

The delays and initial difficulties are likely to prevent various projects from being completed, thereby
harming the fisheries sector and jeopardising the presentation of its projects, which means that the
resources made available may not be utilised and hence the objectives set with a view to reducing the
disparity between the fisheries sector in Italy and the rest of Europe are being only partially achieved.

For this reason the co-operative fisheries movement requested a year’s extension of the deadline for
completion of the projects of the three consortia and the service centres, but instead of obtaining this
forward the deadline for the
extension,
conclusion, recording and certification of projects to 15 December 2001 in its note no 19675 of 17 July
2001.

the Ministry for Agricultural and Forestry Policy brought

It is established practice to put back the deadlines for presenting the accounts of expenditure, in order to
allow the implementation of projects to be completed by the deadline (31 December 2001), as was in fact
envisaged in the last sentence of Article 5 of Commission Decision No 41 of 19 May 1995, which
mentions the final deadline by which the expenditure incurred in the operations concerned may be taken
into account. In the light of all this, what are the Commission’s intentions with regard to granting an
in order to prevent the Italian
extension of the deadlines for the FIFG and PESCA referred to above,
fisheries sector from being penalised further?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(6 November 2001)

The Commission is ready to examine individually all programme extension requests duly made by
Member States by 31 December 2001. It must stress that such action is warranted in only exceptional
circumstances.

The Commission will in fact be able to accept only applications relating to either clearly identified error
attributable solely to the Commission or force majeure, understood as disaster on a large scale with serious
implications for implementation of programmes part-financed from the Structural Funds.

Late adoption of programmes is not in itself an adequate ground for deferring their payment time limits.

In any event the Commission cannot take a formal decision on this matter until an official request has
been sent by the authorities responsible for management of the programmes.

(2002/C 93 E/245)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2863/01

by Vincenzo Lavarra (PSE) to the Commission

(17 October 2001)

Subject: Drift-net fishing in southern Italy B request for a moratorium pending acquisition of scientific

data

In response to pressure from third countries, who considered drift-nets to be a cause of environmental
damage, Regulation (EC) 1239/98 (1), definitively sanctioned the discontinuation of fishing for swordfish
with drift-nets (in Italy around 676 vessels were concerned, almost all of them entered in the Southern
Italian maritime registers).