WRITTEN QUESTION E-3377/02 by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Deductions from farming subsidies by the Agricultural Bank of Greece.
Date: 2002-11-27
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU aid, Greece, agricultural bank, aid system, aid to agriculture

C 155 E/146

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.7.2003

is central to the problem of humanitarian aid in
The issue of the safety of humanitarian personnel
Chechnya and is an issue constantly raised by the Commission. The Commissioner in charge of
Development and Humanitarian Aid travelled to Chechnya twice in 2000 to underline the importance of
this issue to the Commission. Since that time, the question of access and the multiple obstacles the Russian
authorities put in the path of humanitarian organisations on the ground has been at the centre of
discussions between the EU and Russia. The Director of ECHO raised the question during her mission to
Chechnya in March 2001, as did the Head of Unit responsible for Chechnya at ECHO who also went to
Grozny in May 2002, accompanied by the head of delegation. These problems were also discussed more
recently at the EU-Russia summit, the meeting in Moscow between the EU Commissioner in charge of
External Relations and Russia’s foreign affairs minister in October 2002, and the latest Cooperation
Committee meeting with Russia held in Brussels. The issue is constantly raised by the Head of Delegation
to the Commission in Moscow and by ECHO.

It is also clear that this situation calls for adoption of a political position by the European Union. In
addition to the action that can be taken at Commission level, the Council and Parliament also have an
important role to play in denouncing the large-scale and repeated violations of international humanitarian
law and human rights.

Meanwhile, the Commission will ensure that the European Union will continue to monitor the issue of
human rights in Chechnya and will raise the problem in all appropriate forums, such as the bilateral
political dialogue with the Russian Federation, and the discussions and initiatives concerning Chechnya
within the Council of Europe and the OECD.

(2003/C 155 E/162)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3377/02

by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(27 November 2002)

Subject: Deductions from farming subsidies by the Agricultural Bank of Greece

In its answers to my previous questions E-3807/00 (1) and E-3376/01 (2), the Commission recognises that
there are problems concerning the failure to pay EU subsidies in full to Greek farmers. According to a
recent complaint, which has just come to my knowledge, the Agricultural Bank of Greece in the prefecture
of Rodopis does not pay the subsidies in full to Greek farmers but deducts an amount to offset farmers’
debts to the bank.

What view does the Commission take of the deductions made by the Agricultural Bank of Greece from
subsidies intended for Greek farmers?

What developments have there been as a result of the Commission’s representations to the Greek
authorities concerning deductions made by the cooperatives from Community subsidies for Greek farmers?

(1) OJ C 174 E, 19.6.2001, p. 148.
(2) OJ C 134 E, 6.6.2002, p. 225.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(17 January 2003)

Following the Commission’s investigations the Greek authorities have for most sectors introduced with
effect from 2002 for payment of aid amounts directly into the recipient’s bank account.

The Commission’s checks show that the problem appears to have been resolved as far as the integrated
administration and control system is concerned, all payments are now being made in full direct to the
recipient. For the other sectors the Commission is monitoring the situation closely.

3.7.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 155 E/147

Further checks will be made.

Where the Community rules incorporate a ‘full payment’ requirement any direct or indirect levy when the
aid is paid is automatically incompatible with Community law. In the case of outstanding debts to the
banks that have not arisen in connection with management of the aid scheme, the recipient in question
would have to authorise the bank explicitly in writing to offset his outstanding debts to it against an
amount due to him direct aid scheme. If the debts have arisen out of the bank’s administration of the aid
scheme offsetting is not consonant with Community law.

(2003/C 155 E/163)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3381/02

by Brigitte Langenhagen (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(27 November 2002)

Subject: Pilotage in shipping: incorporating preventive security

The terror attacks of 11 September 2001 and, more particularly, the attack on the French supertanker
‘Limburg’, clearly demonstrate the threat also posed by terrorists to international shipping. That applies in
equal measure to international and to territorial waters. It puts not only maritime safety, intended to
prevent shipping accidents and the resultant environmental damage, on the agenda, but also maritime
security, in terms of preventive efforts to combat terrorism.

I put the following questions to the Commission:

1. What options are open to the Commission for taking maritime security into account at European level

in the future?

2.

Is there the option of incorporating aspects of maritime security into the current negotiations on the
‘port-package’?

3. Does the Commission share the view that great importance attaches to the availability of a public
pilotage service in this connection, since it can assume the function of discharging sovereign
responsibilities?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(15 January 2003)

Maritime security has been one of the Commission’s concerns since well before 11 September 2001, as
may be seen from the Transport White Paper, which already referred to the need to step up the security of
passengers embarking on ships offering European cruises.

The Commission backs an approach involving an overall response to the problem of maritime security
through the adoption of international instruments. An International Ship and Port Facility Security Code
was adopted at the International Maritime Organisation’s Diplomatic Conference on Maritime Security on
13 December 2002. The Commission will shortly be presenting a communication including a proposal for
legislation to incorporate these provisions into Community law to ensure they are applied uniformly and
effectively throughout the Community.

Meanwhile, in 2002 the Commission carried out a study on tightening up the security of cruise passengers
in the Union’s Mediterranean ports. Its findings, together with those due from a broader study of the
whole problem of security in ports and its financial consequences, will, together with consultation of the
Member States, allow the necessary additional measures to be identified to improve security in all EU ports.