WRITTEN QUESTION E-1479/02 by Cecilia Malmström (ELDR) to the Council. Association agreement with Algeria.
Date: 2002-05-27
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Algeria, EU relations, association agreement (EU), human rights

C 309 E/128

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

12.12.2002

Does the Commission intend to follow the CPB’s recommendations? Can it indicate which of the two
recommendations it favours? If it does not select the first option, does that mean that the Commission
believes that it has adequate control over the cohesion policy?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(10 July 2002)

The concentration of the resources available on the most affected areas and problems is a basic principle of
the Structural Funds. Accordingly, some two-thirds of the resources are available concentrated on just 22 %
of population in the regions eligible under Objective 1. Concentration was reinforced for the current
period, 2000-2006, compared to the previous period, 1994-1999, and the population eligible under all of
the regional objectives of the Structural Funds has been reduced from 49,8 % to 41,3 %.

With regard to the matter of the control of the Structural Funds, the key principles in this respect are those
of partnership between the Commission and the authorities in the Member States and decentralisation of
responsibilities. In the management of the current generation of regional development programmes, this
has meant the selection of individual projects is a responsibility that is decentralised to the Member States,
once the broad strategic priorities of
the programmes have been agreed in partnership with the
Commission.

The Commission is aware of the report mentioned by the Honourable Members. With the help of
independent experts it has studied the impact of structural interventions for the 2000-2006 period, using
an input-output model, which suggests a clear positive macro-economic impact of the Community
cohesion policy. Annual average growth increases of 0,4 % are estimated for Greece and Portugal over this
period, while they are 0,3 % and 0,2 % respectively for the regions of the Mezzogiorno and the Germany’s
new Länder. So, in general, the Commission does not share the conclusions that emerge from the analysis
in the Netherlands Central Planning Bureau (CPB) report.

The Commission is constantly seeking to improve the efficiency of cohesion policy instruments, without
compromising the financial control of expenditure, for which it remains responsible. A mid-term review of
Structural Funds programmes is foreseen by the end of 2003, which will provide an occasion to assess
how far objectives have been achieved half-way through the current programming period. Moreover, a
performance reserve has been introduced for the Structural Funds, whereby 4 % of allocations are reserved
in order to be disbursed depending upon performance. The objective is to ensure that actions genuinely
add value, which is assessed both ex-ante and ex-post. Finally, simplification of programming and
implementation continues to be at the forefront of the Commission’s agenda.

Looking to the future beyond the end of the current programmes in 2006, the Commission has already
begun its reflection on the reform of Cohesion policy. Concrete proposals for reform will be presented in
the third Cohesion report at the end of 2003. The second cohesion report adopted in January 2001,
launched a wide-ranging debate on the future of cohesion policy.

(2002/C 309 E/152)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1479/02

by Cecilia Malmström (ELDR) to the Council

(27 May 2002)

Subject: Association agreement with Algeria

Negotiations are currently in progress on an association agreement between the European Union and
Algeria. The agreement contains a clause which states that the basis for the agreement will be respect for
human rights and democratic principles. Unfortunately, reports show that there is systematic violation of
human rights in Algeria and that the government of the country often fails to investigate such serious
crimes. Furthermore, Algeria has refused access to UN human rights experts and special rapporteurs.

12.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 309 E/129

there would be a need for substantial
If the EU is to sign an association agreement with Algeria,
improvements in respect for human rights. In what way will the Council ensure that an assessment of the
human rights situation in Algeria and compliance with the article of the association agreement relating to
human rights constitute a separate item on the agenda for all meetings, especially those of the Association
Council, concerning the agreement?

Reply

(3 October 2002)

The Council invites the Honourable Member to refer to the Council’s replies to questions E-0881/02 put
by Patricia McKenna, E-1031/02 put by Philip Bushill-Matthews and E-1109/02 put by Christos Zacharakis
and Konstantinos Hatzidakis.

(2002/C 309 E/153)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1494/02

by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(29 May 2002)

Subject: Problems associated with a jointly funded building project at Perivolia, prefecture of Rethymnon,

Greece

Under the 1986-1993 Integrated Mediterranean Programme for Crete, a day nursery was built at Perivolia
in the prefecture of Rethymnon, which began operation in 1993. The building is now closed as it has
twice been affected by subsidence and is not considered to be safe for the children. The authorities claim
that the subsidence is due to the presence of water in the subsoil. However, serious doubts have been
raised about shoddy workmanship and whether the necessary works inspections were carried out.

1.

Is the Commission familiar with the problems which have arisen with the above project?

If so, what are the causes of the problems created and what steps will the Commission take to

2.
identify where responsibility lies?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(5 July 2002)

The Commission had not been informed of the problem to which the Honourable Member refers.

The Commission is not empowered to determine responsibility in this case. Resolution of the problem is a
matter for the national authorities acting under the relevant national legislation.

(2002/C 309 E/154)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1510/02

by Rosa Miguélez Ramos (PSE) to the Commission

Subject: Fisheries aspects of the EU-Chile association agreement

(29 May 2002)

On 26 April 2002 the Commission and the Government of Chile signed an Association Agreement, which
will be presented in Madrid on 17 May and will be submitted for ratification by the national parliaments
and the European Parliament. This agreement provides for the creation of a free-trade area, a political
dialogue and wide-ranging cooperation.

The agreement has been criticised by the EC fisheries sector, and it appears to have been framed in the
context of a misunderstanding of globalisation: the Commission has given in to the demands of third
countries, opening up the Community market while failing to defend our fleet’s interests. It has not asked