WRITTEN QUESTION P-1705/02 by Gary Titley (PSE) to the Commission. Euromed Train.
Date: 2002-06-07
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU financing, competence of the Member States, facilities for people with disabilities, integration of people with disabilities, rail network

12.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 309 E/153

(2002/C 309 E/178)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1698/02

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(12 June 2002)

Subject: Information measures in the field of the common agricultural policy

It appears that the ARP (cid:1) the Portuguese Alliance for the Protection of the Rural World (cid:1) submitted an
application to the DG for Agriculture within the specified deadlines (after another application for the
programme of activities had not been approved) with a view to holding a conference on the rural world,
the specific topic being ‘the role of rural development for the future of the CAP’, in the context of Council
Regulation (EC) No 814/2000 (1) on information measures relating to the common agricultural policy.

Bearing in mind the importance of the initiative and the need for it to be approved as soon as possible,
with the allocation of a 75 % subsidy from the DG for Agriculture, as happens with the structural funds for
Objective 1 regions, can the Commission supply any information on this application, in particular the
possible date of its approval?

(1) OJ L 100, 20.4.2000, p. 7.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(10 July 2002)

The Commission can confirm that the ARP submitted a grant application for a conference on the rural
world under Council Regulation (EC) No 814/2000 of 17 April 2000 on information measures relating to
the common agricultural policy (Budget heading B1-382).

As a Committee has to scrutinise grant applications in several stages (eligibility, evaluation) before a grant
is awarded, this scrutiny is now under way. The outcome as regards the award of grants, and in particular
the ARP’s application, cannot be known until the scrutiny has ended.

Under the circumstances, we cannot provide any information until this procedure has been completed,
which should be in July 2002.

(2002/C 309 E/179)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1705/02

by Gary Titley (PSE) to the Commission

(7 June 2002)

Subject: Euromed Train

A constituent of mine recently travelled on the Euromed train in Spain. He noted that there were signs
indicating that financial support for the project had come from the European Union. He also noted that
the train has poor accessibility for disabled people since the train floor is nearly one metre above the
platform. My constituent would like to know why EU money was spent on this project without a
requirement for better access for the disabled.

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(11 July 2002)

Regarding access for people of reduced mobility to facilities open to the public, the Commission can only
state that in the absence of a Community legal framework on accessibility of such infrastructure it is up to
the responsible national authorities to see that national requirements are respected.

C 309 E/154

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

12.12.2002

On the specific case raised by the Honourable Member, i.e. the Euromed rail link between Alicante and
Barcelona, assistance from the Structural and Cohesion Funds was granted for track modification,
electrification and safety improvement and also for development/improvement of certain stations. For
more specific information on the aspect of the project to which his question relates and on application of
Spanish legislation in this area, the Commission invites the Honourable Member to contact the project
managing authority: Ministerio de Hacienda, Secretaría de Estado de Presupuestos y Gastos, Dirección
General de Fondos Comunitarios y Financiación Territorial, Paeseo de la Castellana 162, 28071 Madrid.

In future however, in the context of implementation of Council Directive 96/48/EC of 23 July 1996 on
interoperability of the trans-European high speed rail system (1) and Parliament and Council Directive
2001/16/EC of 19 March 2001 on interoperability of the trans-European conventional rail system (2), train
accessibility from the platform for people of reduced mobility will be taken into account where all new
investment and development/improvement work is concerned.

Further, the Commission in its White Paper on future transport policy (3) states its intention of proposing a
trains (4). This will contain
regulation on the rights and obligations of passengers on international
provisions on improving the accessibility of trains and stations to people of reduced mobility and on
information on access. The Commission will also call on the rail sector to take action in parallel, each
acting in its sphere of responsibility.

(1) OJ L 235, 17.9.1996.
(2) OJ L 110, 20.4.2001.
(3) European transport policy for 2010: time to decide (COM(2001) 370 final).
(4) COM(2002) 18 final.

(2002/C 309 E/180)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1706/02

by Andrew Duff (ELDR) to the Council

(13 June 2002)

Subject: Seats in the European Parliament after 2004

On the assumption that all the candidate countries with the exception of Bulgaria, Romania and Turkey
will be taking part in the elections to the European Parliament in June 2004, and according to the bizarre
provisions of Article 2 of Protocol A of the Treaty of Nice, how many seats will then be allocated to each
of the 25 Member States for the 2004-2009 legislature?

If as a result of an equitable adjustment in the accession negotiations Malta is allotted 6 seats and the
Czech Republic and Hungary 22, how many seats will then be allocated to each of the states?

Reply

(8 October 2002)

The Council would remind the Honourable Member that the Treaty of Nice is currently in the process of
being ratified and the accession negotiations have not yet been completed. Incidentally, the Council does
not share the view expressed regarding the Protocol in question.

It is not the Council’s wont to engage in speculation based on unsettled situations in the final outcome of
which the Council has no say.