WRITTEN QUESTION E-2076/02 by Geoffrey Van Orden (PPE-DE) to the Commission. European border police force.
Date: 2002-07-12
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Community body, United Kingdom, border control, customs profession, external border of the EU, paramilitary force

C 137 E/44

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

12.6.2003

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(5 August 2002)

Article 87(2)(b) of the EC Treaty provides that aid to make good the damage caused by natural disasters or
exceptional occurrences shall be compatible with the common market.

Normal entrepreneurial or insurable risks are generally not considered ‘natural disasters’ or ‘exceptional
occurrences’. In the past the Commission has accepted that floods, earthquakes and landslides, avalanches,
tornadoes, etc. could be considered natural disasters. Likewise war, internal disturbances or strikes, major
nuclear or industrial accidents and fires have been considered as ‘exceptional occurrences’.

As regards the foot and mouth crisis, it should be noted that the Community guidelines for State aid in the
agriculture sector explicitly state in point 11.2.1 ‘as a general rule, the Commission does not accept that
outbreaks of animal or plant diseases can be considered to constitute natural disasters or exceptional
occurrences.’ Hitherto, the only exception has been the bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE)-crisis
which was recognised as an exceptional occurrence, because of its widespread nature and its completely
new character.

Nevertheless, the Community guidelines for State aid in the agricultural sector allow for aid to be granted
to compensate for losses incurred as a result of the outbreak of animal or plant disease, including measures
to prevent the further spread of disease.

Compensatory aid to offset indirect losses incurred by economic operators outside of the agricultural
sector would not normally be permitted, because of the difficulties inherent in determining the causes of
any losses incurred and quantifying their amount. However, depending on the precise circumstances of
each case, a variety of aid instruments may be available,
including aid for new investments to help
businesses to diversify, aid for consultancy advice and aid for rescue or restructuring. Moreover, it should
be recalled that under the so-called de minimis rule, aid of up to EUR 100 000 over any three year period
is not covered by the Community State aid rules.

(2003/C 137 E/050)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2076/02

by Geoffrey Van Orden (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(12 July 2002)

Subject: European border police force

The Presidency Conclusions from the Seville Summit make reference to a ‘European border police force’.

Is it intended that such a force would have its own organisation, structure and uniform, chain of command
and jurisdiction? To whom would it be responsible and what steps are now proposed, including timeframe,
in order to take this matter forward?

Is it foreseen that the force would only operate in Member States that are parties to the Schengen
arrangements? In particular, given that the United Kingdom is outside the Schengen arrangements, can the
Commission confirm that no elements of this force would be deployed on the territory of the United
Kingdom?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(3 September 2002)

According to conclusion 31 of the Seville European Council (21/22 June 2002), it will be taken ‘account
of the intention expressed by the Commission to continue examining the advisability and feasibility of
such a [European border] police force’. This sentence refers to the developments that have been achieved
during the last months.

12.6.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 137 E/45

As far as the Commission is concerned, a Communication (1) was adopted on 7 May 2002 on integrated
management of external borders. This Communication is a reply to conclusion 42 of the Laeken European
Council (14/15 December 2001) asking ‘the Council and the Commission to work out arrangements for
co-operation between services responsible for external border control and to examine the conditions in
which a mechanism or common services to control external borders could be created …’. As a
some recommendations and first
consequence the Communication expresses among other
reflections regarding the concept of a European Corps of Border Guard. The Communication stresses
however that the establishment of such a European Corps would require ‘most likely (…) amendment of
the Treaties’.

issues

At this stage of reflections on the powers that could be conferred on a European Corps of Border Guards,
the Communication refers to ‘Article 62 of the EC Treaty, without prejudice to police co-operation efforts
under agreements based on Articles 7 and 47 of the Schengen Convention’. Whilst recognising the special
position of the United Kingdom and Ireland, the Commission has underlined in its Communication that
action to strengthen the Union’s external frontiers is of importance to all Member States. In this respect,
much of the focus needs to be on enhanced operational co-operation. This can benefit from the experience
and input of all Member States.

(1) Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament COM(2002) 233 final:

‘Towards integrated management of the external borders of the Member States of the European Union’.

(2003/C 137 E/051)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2085/02

by Enrique Barón Crespo (PSE) to the Council

Subject: Comprehensive treatment plan for diabetics

(12 July 2002)

On Parliament’s initiative, diabetes was included in the Sixth Framework Programme for Research as one
of the medical conditions to be worked on. Since there are an estimated 19 million known diabetics in the
EU (and probably a further 6 million undiagnosed), does the Council not think that there is a need for a
specific comprehensive priority plan (involving harmonisation of the individual Member States’ regulations)
relating to the disease which, in Europe, causes one death every six minutes?

Reply

(6 February 2003)

As pointed out by the Honourable Member, research on certain aspects of diabetes forms part of the
the Sixth Framework Programme for Research, as adopted by the European
research priorities of
Parliament and Council
in order to concentrate
in codecision. These priorities are sharply focused,
resources on narrow, well-defined areas where they can achieve critical mass and create real added-value
for the European citizen. The Community contribution to the funding of diabetes research in Europe,
is a very limited part of a considerable overall public and private RTD effort which is
however,
commensurate with the scale of the health problem.

In Section 1 of the Framework Programme ‘Integrating European Research’, the content of Thematic
Priority 1.1.1., ‘Life sciences, genomics and biotechnology for health’, point B, ‘Combating major diseases’
forsees:

Application-oriented approach to medical genomics knowledge and technologies including the use of
animal and plant genomics where relevant, mainly in the following fields (1):

(cid:1) combating diabetes, diseases of the nervous system (such as Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s
disease and new variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease and, where relevant, mental illness), cardio-
vascular diseases, and rare diseases;

(…)