WRITTEN QUESTION P-0769/02 by Ioannis Averoff (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Pindos national park.
Date: 2002-03-08
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Community support framework, EU environmental policy, EU programme, Epirus, application of EU law, environmental protection, national park

14.11.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 277 E/85

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(22 May 2002)

Council Regulation (EC) No 2223/96 of 25 June 1996 on the European system of national and
1.
regional accounts in the Community (1) defines the rules for the proper classification in the national
accounts of measures such as the loans in question. They are classified as financial transactions. Eurostat
may ask the Member State involved to clarify the way certain items in the past year’s budget have been
classified. Until now, Eurostat has not conducted such an assessment with respect to the Dutch JSF project.

2.
The Commission has not assessed the compatibility with the State aid rules of the measures in
question. It must be pointed out that under certain conditions Article 296 of the EC-Treaty allows Member
States to take such measures as they consider necessary for the protection of the essential interests of their
security which are connected with the production of arms, munitions and war material.

(1) OJ L 310, 30.11.1996.

(2002/C 277 E/091)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0769/02

by Ioannis Averoff (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(8 March 2002)

Subject: Pindos national park

The northern Pindos is one of the areas which the Greek authorities have put forward for inclusion in the
Natura 2000 network. Community finance has been made available for this area, through the operational
programme for the environment under the 2nd CSF; in order to draw up a management plan with a view
to the designation of the area as a national park. However, none of the procedures provided for under
Greek law, such as the issuing of a presidential decree and the formation of a managerial body, have as yet
been initiated.

What measures will the Commission take to ensure that the Community funds granted for these studies
are used effectively?

Can Community funds be provided to set up the necessary infrastructure for the subsequent operation of
the national parks?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(29 April 2002)

The Pindos National Forest Management project was part-financed under the Environment Operational
Programme of the Greek Community support framework for the 1994-1999 programming period. We are
informed by the Greek authorities that the budget of some € 813 000 allocated to the project was all spent
by the final date of eligibility for expenditure set for that period, i.e. 31 December 2001.

In line with Article 21(4) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88 of 19 December 1998 (1) as amended
by Regulation 2082/93 (2) the Commission awaits the Member States’ transmission by 30 June 2002 of
final declarations of expenditure and final programme execution reports.
In that context the Greek
authorities will have to certify that the conditions set in the decision granting aid have been duly respected.

The Commission has already drawn the Greek authorities’ attention to the need to accelerate the necessary
procedures for implementing management plans part-financed by the Structural Funds or the LIFE
programme for Natura 2000 network sites and so securing their protection. We were informed by the
authorities that the Pindos management plan should be approved at the end of the first quarter of 2002,
the Presidential Decree designating the zone being scheduled for the fourth quarter.

C 277 E/86

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

14.11.2002

Biotope protection infrastructure can be part-financed under the environment OP, which specifies the type
of measure eligible, for the current 2000-06 programming period.

(1) OJ L 374, 31.12.1988.
(2) Council Regulation (EEC) No 2082/93 of 20 July 1993 amending Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88 laying down
provisions for implementing Regulation (EEC) No 2052/88 as regards coordination of the activities of the different
Structural Funds between themselves and with the operations of the European Investment Bank and the other
existing financial instruments, OJ L 193, 31.7.1993.

(2002/C 277 E/092)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0786/02

by Jens-Peter Bonde (EDD) to the Commission

(19 March 2002)

Subject: List of safety and security measures at nuclear power plants

Will the Commission produce a list of safety and security measures taken at nuclear power plants since
11 September and assess the risks posed by a suicide attack such as occurred at the World Trade Center?
Could the risks be eliminated by fitting a 2,5 m-thick concrete shield, as suggested in Politikken on
6 November 2001 by Hans Bjerregård of the Forum for Energy and Development?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(26 April 2002)

The Honourable Member’s question concerns the security measures taken by nuclear power plants
following the events of 11 September 2001. It is important to point out that, because of concerns relating
to non-proliferation and radiological protection, the nuclear industry is one of the sectors of industry with
the highest security and safety standards.

Since 11 September 2001, the authorities in the Member States have strengthened existing protection
arrangements and the physical protection measures already in place for installations at risk, in particular
nuclear power plants. The most obvious measures have been widely reported in the press, such as the
installation of a battery of surface-to-air missiles near the nuclear fuel reprocessing plant at La Hague in
France. Having said that, the physical protection measures are by their very nature confidential. If the
details were released, their dissuasive effect and hence their effectiveness could be compromised.

(2002/C 277 E/093)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0787/02

by Ursula Schleicher (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(19 March 2002)

Subject: Reform of the European Schools

Is the Commission aware of proposals by the Board of Governors of the European Schools to extend the
use of the first foreign language to additional subjects and thereby reduce the use of the mother tongue in
lessons? What is the Commission’s view of the proposals for reform raised by the Board of Governors, and
what steps will it take to prevent most of the other language sections from being compromised?