WRITTEN QUESTION E-3499/01 by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Consequences of the failure to conclude a fisheries agreement with Morocco.
Date: 2002-01-08
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU aid, Morocco, Spain, Structural Funds, aid system, fishing agreement, international negotiations, redevelopment aid, unemployment

4.7.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 160 E/125

Answer given by Ms Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(14 February 2002)

The Commission is not aware of the facts referred to by the Honourable Member.

It should be noted that waste disposal is currently regulated by Council Directive 75/442/EEC (1) of 15 July
1975 on waste, as amended by Council Directive 91/156/EEC (2) of 18 March 1991.

Article 4 of the above-mentioned Directive provides that Member States shall take the necessary measures
to ensure that waste is recovered or disposed of without endangering human health and without using
processes or methods which could harm the environment, and in particular:

0 without risk to water, air, soil and plants and animals,

0 without causing a nuisance through noise or odours,

0 without adversely affecting the countryside or places of special interest.

Under Article 9 of Directive 75/442/EEC, any establishment or undertaking which carries out disposal
operations must obtain a permit from the competent authority.

As regards Council Directive 97/11/EC (3) of 3 March 1997 amending Directive 85/337/EEC on the
assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, installations for the
incineration and chemical treatment of non-hazardous waste with a capacity exceeding 100 tonnes per day
are referred to in Annex I to the Directive, and other waste disposal installations are referred to in Annex
II.

In any event, as guardian of the Treaties, the Commission will take the necessary measures to ensure
compliance with Community law in this case.

(1) OJ L 194, 25.7.1975.
(2) OJ L 78, 26.3.1991.
(3) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997.

(2002/C 160 E/161)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3499/01

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(8 January 2002)

Subject: Consequences of the failure to conclude a fisheries agreement with Morocco

In March 2001, the negotiations on a fisheries agreement between the EU and Morocco were broken off.
The European Union responded by providing support for Spanish fishermen. The southern Spanish village
of Barbate symbolised their plight, being home to no fewer than 4 000 fishermen who were affected. Until
the end of 2001, they will receive € 900 in aid from the EU. It has been suggested that investing in
tourism could be one solution. Press reports refer to an increase in racism directed against Moroccan
fellow-citizens in the region. At the same time, many ex-fishermen are now said to be using their boats to
smuggle drugs.

1.

2.

3.

How many of the 4 000 fishermen affected have since found new jobs?

Has the Commission also invested structurally in tourism?

Is the Commission aware of an increase in racism in the region?

Is the Commission aware of an increase in drugs transactions in the region? Are unemployed

4.
fishermen involved?

5. Will the Commission resume talks with Morocco with the aim of improving the situation in southern
Spain?

C 160 E/126

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

4.7.2002

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(12 February 2002)

The Commission’s information is that the number of fishermen from Barbate affected by non-renewal of
the fishery agreement with Morocco is not 4 000 but 649. It is unable at present to say how many of these
have found another job.

Knowing that many fishermen would be unable to find fresh employment at sea, the Commission
proposed specific conversion measures additional to the aid already offered under the Community rules in
force. Adopted by the Council on 18 December 2001, these substantially increase the premiums for
fishermen converting to other activities. Further, coastal zones dependent on fisheries such as Barbate
benefit from Community financial assistance for socio-economic diversification through the Structural
Fund Objective 1 programmes.

On structural investment in tourism, the Commission must point out that under Council Regulation (EC)
No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 on general provisions on the Structural Funds (1) selection of the
individual projects part-financed under each programme is an exclusive responsibility of the Member State.

The Commission has not been informed of any increase in racism in the region nor is it aware of any rise
in drug trafficking or involvement of unemployed fishermen in this.

On resumption of discussions with Morocco, the Commission must point out that the Council concluded
on 24 April 2001 that it was impossible as matters stood to reach a mutually beneficial fishery agreement
between the Community and Morocco.

Since then the Commission has received no formal or indeed any proposal from the Moroccan authorities
on the future of our fishery relations. If any approach is made the Commission will carefully examine the
proposal and if appropriate seek a mandate from the Council to reopen negotiations.

(1) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.

(2002/C 160 E/162)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3501/01

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(8 January 2002)

Subject: State-subsidised cross-border trade in electricity and the lack of reserve capacity for emergencies

1.
Can the Commission confirm that, although certain cross-border power lines were installed primarily
for use in emergencies, the Netherlands makes full use of them even under normal circumstances to
import 20 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity, equivalent to one fifth of domestic demand, so that if the
Netherlands’ domestic electricity production were unexpectedly to be interrupted, no additional imports
would be possible to compensate temporarily for the shortfall?

2.
Is the Commission aware that, in addition to the five existing power lines between the Netherlands
and its two neighbours, the energy companies operating in the Netherlands and TenneT, the operator of
the electricity grid, are establishing extra capacity for electricity imports by constructing a new line from
Germany which could quickly increase import capacity by 25 % to 25 billion kilowatt-hours, or a quarter
of domestic electricity demand?