WRITTEN QUESTION P-3641/01 by Rosa Miguélez Ramos (PSE) to the Commission. Community aid for emigrants in Argentina.
Date: 2002-01-07
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Argentina, EU national, European Social Fund, aid policy, cooperation policy, economic situation

5.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 301 E/17

The United Nations Security Council has adopted sanctions against the rebel movements in Sierra Leone
and Angola and against the Liberian government for their support to the rebels. The sanctions include a
prohibition to import rough diamonds from Liberia and from Angola and Sierra Leone, if they are not
accompanied by a certificate of origin issued by the respective legitimate governments.

The sanctions have not been able to stop the flow of conflict diamonds into the legitimate trade or to
bring the conflicts to a halt.

In order to complement the sanctions regimes, a regime of controls has been discussed within the so called
Kimberley Process for about two years. The United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) asked participants
of the Kimberley Process to put forward proposals for a simple and workable international certification
scheme for rough diamonds. The purpose of the process is to find ways and means to create a system that
would protect the legitimate trade in diamonds against the influx of conflict diamonds.

The Commission has been actively participating in the negotiations on behalf of the Community.

The Kimberley Process has presented a proposal for a Certification Scheme for Rough Diamonds to the
UNGA at the end of 2001. The UNGA is expected to consider the proposal in March 2002.

Illicit trafficking in diamonds constitutes a serious crime, which can only be addressed effectively through
close co-operation at international
level. Although no specific law enforcement initiatives have been
adopted at Union level against this particular form of crime, considerable recent action and initiatives have
focused on combating organised criminal and terrorist activities in general, including their financing.

(2002/C 301 E/015)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3641/01

by Rosa Miguélez Ramos (PSE) to the Commission

(7 January 2002)

Subject: Community aid for emigrants in Argentina

Community citizens who have emigrated to Argentina are suffering the effects of the serious economic and
social crisis afflicting the country, especially those over the age of 65, who are unable to work and are
losing their savings and their pensions.

The European Union uses financial instruments such as the European Social Fund to provide support
programmes for Community citizens resident in the Member States, as well as projects to assist the
immigrants from third countries. Community emigrants to third countries such as
integration of
Argentina, however, are facing serious problems and feel they have no one to turn to.

Is the EU undertaking or helping to finance any projects to assist emigrants in Argentina?

What financial instrument could be used to fund a Community project to demonstrate Europe’s solidarity
with its fellow citizens in Argentina and who would be responsible for taking an initiative of this kind?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(15 February 2002)

The European Social Fund area of interventions is limited to Community territory. There is no financial
instrument comparable to the European Social Fund, aimed at providing support to Community citizens
outside of this territory.

C 301 E/18

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

5.12.2002

On the other hand, the programmes for development and co-operation with third countries (under the
Asia and Latin America (ALA) regulation in the case of Argentina) aim at implementing programmes to
support the development of these third countries or promote their co-operation with European bodies in
established priority areas. They are not targeted on specific populations on the basis of their country of
origin and can not be used for such purposes.

At present, there is no financial instrument directly targeting European migrants in Argetina neither in its
social policies nor in its external relations policies.

(2002/C 301 E/016)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3656/01

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(14 January 2002)

Subject: Government grants for the redevelopment of the Scottish North Sea port of Rosyth which benefit

a single company

1.
Is the Commission aware that the Greek ferry company Superfast Ferries has been selected as the
‘preferred operator’ for the provision of freight and passenger transport services between Rosyth, a former
naval port which is to be redeveloped on the northern shore of the Firth of Forth in Scotland, and
Zeebrugge in Belgium and that it has received an undertaking from the Scottish Executive that the port at
Rosyth will be adapted to its requirements?

2.
Is it also aware that the adaptations at Rosyth mean making a 60 % government grant towards a total
investment worth £ 20 million, including provision for the construction of a linkspan (vehicle embarkation
and disembarkation bridge), whose dimensions are apparently suitable for use only by Superfast Ferries
vessels, so that it will not be a port facility for general use?

3.
Does the Commission consider it proper for ScotLine Shipping VOF/ScotLine Ferries (Scot) Ltd,
which was planning to operate a two-vessel roll-on, roll-off freight service between Leith, close to
Edinburgh on the southern shore of the Firth of Forth, and Vlissingen in the Netherlands from spring
2002, to have been invited on 12 November 2001 by Forth Ports plc to opt for Rosyth rather than Leith,
despite the lack of suitable facilities there for vessels other than those used by Superfast Ferries?

4.
To what extent does the Commission consider this to be a case of seeking justification for a
government grant by urging a second company to use the facilities concerned so as to create the
impression that they are for general use, when in reality this appears to be nothing more than doing a
favour for one company?

Does modernisation of the port at Rosyth using EU funds stand in the way of similar funding also

5.
being used later to modernise the port at Leith, which also belongs to Forth Ports Plc?

6.
How does the Commission propose to ensure that freight traffic between Scotland and the Dutch and
Belgian coasts, the volume of which is expected to be greater than the combined transport capacity of the
two companies currently involved, can move without being restricted unnecessarily as a result of facilities
being of the wrong dimensions or of preferential treatment being given to one specific company?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(21 February 2002)

1.
accorded to Superfast Ferries, amounting to EUR 500 000,

As the Honourable Member knows a PACT grant (Pilot Actions for Combined Transport) has been
in connection with starting a new service