WRITTEN QUESTION E-2989/01 by Paul Rübig (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Funding for the Sixth R & D Framework Programme.
Date: 2001-10-29
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Community budget, EU programme, economic growth, information technology, research and development, research policy

6.6.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 134 E/167

Reprocessing plants, such as those at Sellafield and La Hague, require particular attention because of the
high concentration of radioactive materials held in large quantities, notably uranium or plutonium left over
from spent fuels. Therefore the vulnerability of these installations must be considered in the context of the
actual radioprotection consequences of a terrorist act.

(1) COM(2001) 707 final.

(2002/C 134 E/168)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2989/01

by Paul Rübig (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(29 October 2001)

Subject: Funding for the Sixth R & D Framework Programme

The most important sources of European prosperity are those industrial sectors which export large
volumes of goods, since they generate competition and growth. In the Commission proposal for a decision
on the Framework Programme for Research, Technological Development and Demonstration for the
period 2002-2006 the funding allocated to some sectoral budgets fails to reflect the significance of the
European Union’s balance of trade.

Given its key role in generating economic growth, the focusing of support on the sphere of Information
Society Technologies (IST)
increase
competitiveness in fields where the Union is lagging behind, and those benefits will also spill over into
other areas.

is justified, since increased investment in these technologies will

However, by comparison with the IST sector, which, when calculated on the basis of EU export volumes,
receives seven times more support, the funding for the Materials/Machines/Vehicles sector under the
thematic programme Nanotechnologies,
Intelligent Materials and New Production Processes seems
inadequate.

What explanation can the Commission give for the funding of the individual sub-programmes in the light
of the criterion outlined above, having regard to the issue of Europe’s competitiveness and the contribution
to the safeguarding of jobs and prosperity which export successes can make?

Answer given by Mr Busquin on behalf of the Commission

(7 January 2002)

for a new research Framework Programme 2002-2006 (1)

In the proposal
(the Sixth Framework
Programme), the choice of the priority areas on which to concentrate Community efforts and of the
budget to be attributed to themes based on the principle of greater value-added at the European level, in
particular on the need to:

> concentrate resources on the scientific and technological challenges and opportunities Europe will be

confronted with,

> mobilise resources to achieve critical mass,

> achieve greater complementarity with national > public and private > research investments in the

relevant areas.

The actions to be carried out under priority 1.1.3 ‘Nanotechnologies,
intelligent materials, and new
production processes’ are intended to help Europe develop the knowledge and the technologies on the
advanced materials, products, services and manufacturing processes which are important for industrial
competitiveness. As compared with the Fifth Framework Programme, nanotechnologies is an entirely new
priority. The proposal for the Sixth Framework Programme would result in a tripling of the budget
compared to current levels of support. In its Resolution on the Caudron Report, Parliament has not voted
to change the budget proposed by the Commission for this priority.

(1) OJ C 240 E, 28.8.2001.