WRITTEN QUESTION E-1007/02 by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. The enlargement negotiations, agriculture and the Sapard programme.
Date: 2002-04-12
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: accession to the European Union, linguistic discrimination, official language, use of languages

C 301 E/76

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

5.12.2002

Monitoring activities will gradually be adapted and developed to ensure the continuity of data collection
over time and the achievement of the new goals. Data collection methods and networks will also be
reviewed. Studies will be carried out as a basis for proposals for optimising and developing monitoring
activities. Consideration will be given to biodiversity and climate protection.

The action will have to be centrally coordinated due to the increasing demand for a flexible monitoring
programme and the need for integrated data assessment. No specific comments on this can be made at
present, however, as the details of who will take care of the technical and scientific aspects of the new
action have yet to be decided.

The Member States and the EU have entered into obligations under the Convention on Long-range
Transboundary Air Pollution (UN/ECE). Since 1986, therefore, the International Cooperative Programme
on Integrated Monitoring of Air Pollution Effects on Ecosystems (ICP Forests) and the EU have been
working together to ascertain forest health. Efforts should be therefore be made to ensure that cooperation
with ICP Forests continues under the new action, particularly in the field of atmospheric pollution.

(1) Council Regulation (EEC) No 3528/86 of 17 November 1986 on the protection of the Community’s forests against

atmospheric pollution, OJ L 326, 21.11.1986.

(2) Council Regulation (EEC) No 2158/92 of 23 July 1992 on protection of the Community’s forests against fire,

OJ L 217, 31.7.1992.

(2002/C 301 E/082)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1007/02

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(12 April 2002)

Subject: The enlargement negotiations, agriculture and the Sapard programme

Article 5(1) and (2) of the various multiannual financing agreements between the Commission and the
governments of the individual candidate countries (Lithuania, Latvia, Hungary, Bulgaria, Estonia, Poland,
the Czech Republic, Slovenia and Romania)
in connection with the Sapard programme imposes a
requirement to communicate in English: ‘Any communication between the Commission and (…) related to
this Agreement shall be in English.’ Article 10 of these agreements stipulates that only the English text of
the agreement shall be authentic.

Why did the Commission choose English as the language of communication? Can it give an assurance that
these documents will be translated into all the official languages of the Union, and does it also intend that
English should in future be the sole medium of communication for other contacts with authorities in the
candidate countries?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(19 June 2002)

It is not the policy of the Commission to use solely English as the means of communication with candidate
countries. The choice of language in the contacts between candidate countries and the Commission
depends on whether it is understandable and expedient to both parties.

A particular good example for language use is the co-operation between candidate countries and long-term
experts in the field of twinning, where it is not unusual e.g. for Estonians to use Finnish with Finnish pre-
accession advisors; French is used widely e.g.
in Romania, and German is also frequently a common
language.

Concerning the Community support for pre-accession measures for agriculture and rural development
(Sapard) English was chosen for practical reasons. In particular, the Commission point out that the volume
of documents per country would already average around 1000 pages.