WRITTEN QUESTION E-2489/02 by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission. Management of ESF funds by the Madrid Institute for Employment and Business Training (IMEFE) — new information.
Date: 2002-09-06
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Social Fund, Spain, audit, business management, financial control, report, vocational training

17.4.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 92 E/175

Is the Commission aware of these practices?

What measures has it adopted to put an end to them?

Has the Commission acted to ensure that Member States operate customs checks to ensure that fish
imported from Morocco has not been caught using driftnets?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(17 October 2002)

The Commission is aware of the imports of tuna caught by Moroccan vessels to which the Honourable
Member refers.

The ban on using driftnets to catch highly migratory species effective from 1 January 2002 and introduced
by Council Regulation (EC) No 1239/98 of 8 June 1998 amending Regulation (EC) No 894/97 laying
down certain technical measures for the conservation of fishery resources (1), applies only to the fishing
activities of Community vessels or third-country vessels fishing in Community waters.

In consequence, the Regulation cannot prohibit imports of fish caught with driftnets by vessels flying the
flag of a third country outside Community waters.

The Commission has no information to indicate that the fish exported by the Moroccan vessels in question
were caught in Community waters.

(1) OJ L 171, 17.6.1998.

(2003/C 92 E/231)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2489/02

by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission

(6 September 2002)

Subject: Management of ESF funds by the Madrid Institute for Employment and Business Training

(IMEFE) (cid:1) new information

In its answer to Written Question E-1094/02 (1) the Commission said that following the audit by the IGAE
(General Inspectorate for Economic Activities) the UAFSE (Administrative Unit for the ESF) carried out an
additional check on the IMEFE (measures of its own plus external measures), the financial conclusions of
which might lead to even more substantial corrections.

In the meantime, according to 28 June edition of the newspaper El Pais, a second assessment by the
UAFSE, completed in May 2002, has apparently revealed a much smaller number of irregularities.

Can the Commission confirm that this report is true?

Can it explain the reason for this development?

Can the Commission guarantee that it is monitoring the procedure with all necessary care and that in due
course it will forward a detailed report to Parliament in the context of the discharge for the 2001 budget?

(1) OJ C 52 E, 6.3.2003, p. 37.

C 92 E/176

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

17.4.2003

Answer given by Ms Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(12 November 2002)

In addition to the answer given by the Commission to written question E-1094/02 from the Honourable
Member, the Commission would like to stress the following points:

(cid:1) the UAFSE report that was mentioned in the article in the edition of the ‘El País’ newspaper of 28 June
2002 concerns only the IMEFE’s own measures (‘Medios Propios’). Indeed, the final version of this
UAFSE assessment report, which was finalised on 29 May 2002, sets out, following the allegations
made by the IMEFE, a reduction in the amounts initially calculated in the provisional version of this
report;

(cid:1) an additional report on the activity of the IMEFE concerning the ‘Assistencias técnicas’ (technical

assistance) external courses will have to be submitted to the Commission.

In the light of the above, the following statements should be made:

(cid:1) the two UAFSE reports referred to in the press are in fact the provisional and final versions of the

same report;

(cid:1) the amounts mentioned in the UAFSE report cannot be compared with those included in the IGAE

report, which covered the entire activity of the IMEFE.

In conclusion, the Commission can confirm that it is monitoring this matter with all necessary care.

(2003/C 92 E/232)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2500/02

by Laura González Álvarez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(9 September 2002)

Subject: Threats to the historical, cultural, social and environmental heritage in Seville (Spain)

Neighbourhood associations and cultural, professional, environmental and trade union organisations etc. in
Seville have joined forces to demand a more habitable city, in a campaign regarding transport in the
historic centre of the city, based on European recommendations and guidelines concerning the urban
environment, reducing CO2 emissions and noise and air pollution. Their ultimate aim is to safeguard the
historical, cultural, social and environmental heritage.

The campaigners have expressed their concern at the building of three carparks in a unique area of the city
full of historic buildings, despite views expressed by experts, who consider that the use of private vehicles
should be restricted and pedestrian areas be extended in this district and that the indiscriminate felling of
trees be avoided, as is planned for example in the Alameda de Hércules park, which is a symbol of the city.

What steps can the Commission take to ensure the implementation of Community law in this particular
case, in particular Directive 85/337/EEC (1) on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private
projects on the environment?

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(22 October 2002)

Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985, on the assessment of the effects of certain public and
private projects on the environment, as amended by Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997 (1),
requires that certain listed types of project are subject to an environmental impact assessment (EIA) before
consent can be given. The projects to which the Directive applies are divided into two Annexes. Projects
listed in Annex I to the Directive require environmental impact assessment (EIA) in all cases. Projects listed
in Annex II to the Directive require EIA if they are likely to have significant effects on the environment.