WRITTEN QUESTION E-1651/02 by Daniel Hannan (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Complimentary tickets.
Date: 2002-06-10
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European official, corruption, sports body

6.2.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 28 E/125

Commission carried out on three specific projects, part-financed under the Cohesion Fund, on the railway
line between Patras and Greece’s northern border. This is standard practice in the day-to-day management
of the Fund: under the Cohesion Fund Regulation (1), the findings of checks on projects are to be examined
in partnership with the national authorities concerned. This procedure is in progress.

It is too soon to predict which programmes and amounts will be subject to automatic decommitment,
known as the n+2 rule and governed by Article 31(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of
21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds (2). The rule will not apply to Greece
until the end of 2003 because the first commitments for the 2000-2006 period were made in 2001.

The deadline set for eligibility of expenditure for the 1994-1999 programming period was 31 December
2001. Member States had six months (cid:1) i.e. until 30 June 2002 (cid:1) to submit final declarations of
expenditure and final reports on programmes’ implementation, the deadline for completion of any appeals
being 31 March 2003. Consequently, the Commission cannot at this stage provide any information about
the Greek programmes’ closure.

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 1264/1999 of 21 June 1999 amending Regulation (EC) No 1164/94 establishing a

Cohesion Fund, OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.

(2) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.

(2003/C 28 E/141)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1620/02

by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Chancellor Gordon Brown’s ‘Golden Rule’

(6 June 2002)

Does the Commission believe that Chancellor Gordon Brown’s so-called ‘golden rule’, which stipulates that
investment expenditure by government
(however welcome it might be) should not be counted as
expenditure for the purposes of the Growth and Stability Pact, is an example of fiscal rectitude consistent
with the terms of the Pact or something closer to ‘voodoo economics’ which will damage the U.K.’s
chances of achieving a balanced budget over the economic cycle?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(27 June 2002)

The ‘golden rule’ is one of the British government’s two fiscal rules introduced to secure sound public
finances. The British government has also subscribed to the terms of the Stability and Growth Pact. This
requires that the government finances show a close to balance or surplus position in the medium term. In
practice, the British government finances have been close to balance or in surplus in recent years, thus
they have achieved the British
upholding the requirements of
government’s own fiscal rules. There would, therefore, not appear to have been an inconsistency up to
now between the achievement of the terms of the Pact and the government’s fiscal rules. It should be
noted that the achievement of the two British fiscal rules is a matter for the British government. It is
compliance with the Stability and Growth Pact that the Commission addresses in its surveillance and
assessment of the British public finances.

the Pact, while, at

the same time,

(2003/C 28 E/142)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1651/02

by Daniel Hannan (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(10 June 2002)

Subject: Complimentary tickets

Would the Commission say which of its employees have received complimentary tickets to Football World
Cup events?

C 28 E/126

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

6.2.2003

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(10 July 2002)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to his Written Question E-0548/00 (1).
The Commission still does not have a general record of which officials, if any, were provided with tickets,
whether paid for or free of charge, for the football World Cup. The rules set out in the answer to
E-0548/00 continue to apply.

(1) OJ C 26 E, 26.1.2001.

(2003/C 28 E/143)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1662/02

by Theresa Villiers (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(11 June 2002)

Subject: Protection of marine life

Does the Commission believe that the use of pelagic trawls has reduced the number of unintended

1.
killings of cetaceans?

2.
Does the Commission have any intention of commissioning an independent assessment of the
damage being done by pelagic trawls, including the number of dolphins, porpoises and smaller whales
being caught in these nets?

Does the Commission have any plans to demand compulsory monitoring of cetacean bycatch in all

3.
European waters?

4.

Does the Commission have any plans to ban all large-scale netting, as well as drift netting?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(4 July 2002)

The Commission is aware of possible by-catches of cetaceans by using pelagic trawls, but has no

1.
information on the trends over time of such by-catches.

2. With regard to the assessment of cetaceans by-catches in different fisheries, including in pelagic trawl
fisheries, and to the possible monitoring and mitigation measures to be taken in a co-ordinate manner at
Community level, the Commission invites the Honourable Member to refer to its previous replies to
written questions E-500/02 by Mr Martin (1) or E-967/02 by Mr Wyn (2) in particular.

3.
In any case, the Commission is aware of the need to improve the monitoring of the status of
conservation of cetacean species and of the possible impact that by-catch may have on it. To this end, the
Commission would like to stress the obligation for Member States to fully comply with relevant provisions
of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna
and flora (3).

The Commission would also remind that the Community has already put in place a general ban on
4.
the use of drift nets, Council Regulation (EC) No 1239/98 of 8 June 1998 amending Regulation (EC) No
fishery resources (4). This
894/97 laying down certain technical measures for the conservation of
prohibition entered into force on 1 January 2002 and is applicable within all Community waters except
the Baltic Sea and to all Community fishing boats outside Community waters.

(1) OJ C 229 E, 26.9.2002, p. 93.
(2) OJ C 277 E, 14.11.2002.
(3) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.
(4) OJ L 171, 17.6.1998.