WRITTEN QUESTION E-3028/01 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Enlargement and the cattle sector.
Date: 2001-10-30
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: accession negotiations, cattle, enlargement of the Union, livestock farming, milk

C 172 E/22

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.7.2002

budget of all programmes, which were implemented by the European Training Foundation (ETF),
amounted to a total of € 11 million during the years 1995-1997. The main purpose of the programmes
was to promote awareness and application of modern open and distance learning methods.

The majority of appropriations were not used to purchase PCs. In the context of the creation of study
centres, for 1995-1996 approximately 18 % (14,5 % for 1997) of the total budget has been spent on basic
equipment (computers, networks, multi-media production facilities). This represents a lower proportion
than is usual
in PHARE projects on the development of vocational training. Problems raised in the
programme assessment, carried out in July 1999, relating to the late delivery or installation of equipment
provided were solved before the end of the programme in September 1999. Only in one case equipment
was installed after the end of the programme.

The results of the programmes included enhanced institutional co-ordination for distance education in 11
countries and the establishment of 45 regional distance education study centres. In addition, 31 multi-
country distance courses were developed. The average cost for these courses amounts to € 80 000 6
€ 100 000, from the course design to the final delivery. Over 1 000 participants took part. Moreover, the
study centres themselves developed more than 200 distance learning courses. Overall,
the 1999
programme assessment concluded that the programme was successfully implemented and contributed to
the development of the countries’ educational systems by improving modern, media supported teaching
and learning. A further evaluation carried out in April 2001 confirmed these findings.

ETF undertook a survey on the sustainability of the programme’s results (http://www.etf.eu.int/etfweb.nsf/
pages/pharedown/$file/sustainability.doc) in September 2000, one year after the programme activities had
been finalised. It shows that most of the study centres were continuing the delivery of courses. The
number of courses is estimated at about 130. The programme requested the development of pilot courses
for which no specific examination was required. However, some of the courses have been adopted as part
of the national education and training systems and most of them have developed plans for future
accreditation. Further updated information would require a more detailed survey. The Commission will ask
the ETF to conduct this survey in September 2002.

Given the above information the Commission does not consider
that appropriations have been
squandered. Within the regular audit activities in PHARE, a closing audit of the programme will be
conducted in 2002.

In the context of the pre-accession strategy, the Foundation’s role and activities comprise their involvement
in current policy developments of the Union and the contribution to their preparation for full participation
at the time of accession. In this framework, the national observatories produce information and analysis
concerning training and labour market developments and the ETF co-operates with the European Centre
for the Development of Vocational Training (CEDEFOP). The ETF focuses on those countries that face
particular problems with the modernisation of their training systems, namely Bulgaria, Romania and
Turkey.

Decisions concerning Community Agencies are taken by the Council.
the
Foundation’s role in candidate countries will cease upon the date of accession. However, the ETF will
continue to support (through policy guidance and project management) the reform of vocational education
and management training in over 30 partner countries in the Mediterranean region, the Western Balkans,
the New Independent States and Mongolia.

is understood that

It

(2002/C 172 E/023)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3028/01

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Enlargement and the cattle sector

(30 October 2001)

What is the current situation of the negotiations with the various candidate countries with regard to both
the milk and beef cattle sectors, and what progress has been made? With regard to the milk sector, chapter
I, what reference quantities are being used for the various countries, and what are the deadlines being
worked on?

18.7.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 172 E/23

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(17 December 2001)

The accession negotiations on agriculture, including the animal products sector, were opened in June 2000
with Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Poland and Slovenia and in June 2001 with Latvia,
Lithuania and Slovakia. The negotiation chapter on agriculture has not yet been opened with Bulgaria,
Malta and Romania. Romania has not yet presented its negotiation position on agriculture.

The Community’s negotiation Position on agriculture states that the reference quantity for milk must be
determined taking account of historical production figures during a reference period to be defined and the
need to avoid adding to Community market surpluses, having regard also to World Trade Organisation
(WTO) constraints. As regards the beefmeat sector it is further stated that ceilings must be determined on
the basis of the actual herd as well as slaughtering and live exports, specified in the relevant age groups
and cattle categories, during a reference period to be defined.

The Union has not yet taken a final position with regard to the above issues but has requested more
the period 1995-1999. The Commission’s
detailed information from the candidate countries
Enlargement Strategy Paper of November 2000 foresees that the agricultural
issues that have a major
impact on the Community budget, such as direct payments or quotas, should be addressed in the first half
of 2002.

for

(2002/C 172 E/024)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3031/01

by Maurizio Turco (NI) to the Commission

(30 October 2001)

Subject: Clarification of

the reply to Oral Question H-0751/01 concerning UNIDCP activities

in

Afghanistan

Further to the clarifications which it provided in its written reply of 2 October 2001 to Oral Question
H-0751/01 (1), to the effect that it has funded projects in Afghanistan, would the Commission now state:

1. what the objectives are, how many projects are involved and how much they are costing;

2. who has organised and implemented them; and

3.

under which budget heading they have been funded?

(1) Written answer of 2.10.2001.

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(11 January 2002)

The Community currently finances no project specifically related to the fight against drugs in Afghanistan.
Moreover, the Community is financing actions in favour of uprooted people in this country, on the credits
available under budget line B7-302, which can be of benefit to those populations suffering as result of the
poppy ban.

These actions, their location, their costs, as well as the organisations which carry them out, are displayed
in the table which is sent direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat.

On the base of
the adoption of the Regulation 2130/2001 of 29 October 2001 of the European
Parliament and of the Council, on operations to aid uprooted people in Asian and Latin American