WRITTEN QUESTION E-2442/02 by Marco Cappato (NI) to the Council. Report by the Contraloría de la República on the Plan Colombia.
Date: 2002-08-28
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Colombia, EU aid, EU financing, action programme, drug traffic, establishment of peace

C 92 E/170

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

17.4.2003

is proposing a
In light of the Commission’s own admissions, can the Commission explain why it
management regime for the North Sea which could result in the decimation of fish stocks which have
already severely declined, with a potentially devastating impact on fisheries-dependent communities located
on the North Sea?

(1) OJ C 28 E, 6.2.2003, p. 154.

Answer given by Mr. Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(1 October 2002)

In its reply to written question P-1902/02 by the Honourable Member (1), the Commission referred to
species not subject to catch limitations in the North Sea. However, it should be recalled that all the most
commercially important species in the North Sea are subject to total allowable catches (TACs) and quotas.
Therefore any comments about non-quota species should be regarded against the background of the
existing conservation measures for the main stocks.

In the light of the TACs and quotas and technical measures already applicable for the main species in the
North Sea there is certainly no reason to consider Community policy as being a ‘free-for-all’. On the
contrary, Community policy has considerably tightened up conservation of these species over years,
following the Commission’s initiative.

Any remark concerning non-quota species in the North Sea should be put in perspective. Non-quota
species can hardly justify directed fisheries, and the Commission is not aware of significant fisheries
targeting non-quota species in the North Sea beyond 12 miles. Therefore it is clear for the Commission
that the vast majority, if not all the fishing activity in the North Sea is indeed subject to the existing
conservation measures. The Commission, in any case, is fully prepared (as shown with recent initiatives
such as the cod and hake recovery plan) to do everything necessary to improve conservation of stocks in
all Community regions, including the introduction of fishing effort limitations alongside catch limits and
technical rules for fishing.

The Commission has also indicated, in the ‘Roadmap’ to the reform of the Common Fisheries Policy, that it
intends to bring as many species as possible under Community legislation in the North Sea, as the
necessary scientific basis becomes available.

(1) OJ C 28 E, 6.2.2003, p. 154.

(2003/C 92 E/224)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2442/02

by Marco Cappato (NI) to the Council

(28 August 2002)

Subject: Report by the Contraloría de la República on the Plan Colombia

In view of the fact that the Contraloría General de la República Colombiana (Office of the Comptroller
General of Colombia) has stated in its third assessment report on the Plan Colombia that:

(cid:1) the anti-drugs Plan Colombia contains administrative irregularities;

(cid:1) eradication by force has failed to strike a blow at drug traffickers, so much so that today 163 000
hectares are still under illegal cultivation across the country and cultivation of
the crop has
outstripped its destruction, since 152 000 hectares were burned between 2000 and 2002, and despite
this coca is now being grown in areas previously dedicated to coffee production;

(cid:1) the Plan Colombia is unsatisfactory from an environmental standpoint;

17.4.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 92 E/171

and since the European Union is contributing 31 million dollars to the Plan does the Council intend to
take action to suspend cooperation with this Colombian anti-drugs Plan?

If not, what reforms will it propose to prevent even more European taxpayers’ money from being wasted?

Reply

(19 December 2002)

1. While supporting the efforts of the Colombian government to put an end to the violence that affects
this country, the European Union is not contributing to the so-called ‘Plan Colombia’. The EU has put
forward its own support package, made public in Bogotá on 24 October 2000. At the third meeting of the
Support Group for the peace process in Colombia, on 30 April 2001 in Brussels, an EC contribution of
EUR 140 million (EUR 105 million in programmable aid and EUR 35 million in non-programmable aid)
was confirmed. In addition, Member States’ contributions amount to up to EUR 230 million.

2.

EC assistance is focused on:

(cid:1) the support of ongoing Colombian activities in the search for peace;

(cid:1) targeting the roots and causes of the conflict;

(cid:1) providing humanitarian assistance to the victims of the conflict.

As concerns its own assistance, the EU closely monitors that its implementation is in line with the

3.
established objectives and rules.

(2003/C 92 E/225)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2468/02

by Daniela Raschhofer (NI) to the Commission

(29 August 2002)

Subject: EU funding for flood aid

Over the past few weeks, Austria, Germany and the Czech Republic have been devastated by floods of
hitherto unimagined proportions.

Thousands of people have been deprived of their livelihoods; their lives have been destroyed.

The cost of the damage caused by the flood amounts to several billion euro.

In view of this catastrophe:

(cid:1) To what extent could structural assistance be redeployed so as to make funding available from the EU

Structural Funds, in order to ensure that the victims receive rapid financial assistance?

(cid:1) How much financial assistance could be granted, and how soon?

(2003/C 92 E/226)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2506/02

by Wolfgang Ilgenfritz (NI) to the Commission

(3 September 2002)

Subject: Disaster fund for flood victims

Over the past few weeks, Austria, Germany and the Czech Republic have been devastated by floods of
hitherto unimagined proportions.