WRITTEN QUESTION E-3890/02 by Robert Goebbels (PSE) to the Commission. Implementation of the Sapard programme in 2001.
Date: 2003-01-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU financing arrangements, European Commission, accession to the European Union, administration of the Institutions, farm modernisation, implementation of the budget, management accounting

18.9.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 222 E/121

is balanced and efficient in
The Commission considers that the text of the abovementioned proposal
protecting workers at source in stipulating: ‘Before beginning demolition or maintenance work, employers
shall take, if appropriate by obtaining information from the owners of the premises, all necessary steps to
identify presumed asbestos-containing materials. If there is any doubt about the presence of asbestos in a
material or construction, the applicable provisions of this Directive shall be observed.’

2.
The Commission is not at present prepared to take steps on the question of registers either regarding
their role in determining the extent of the problem or in connection with precautionary measures.
Nevertheless, in the event of an accident, for example a fire, affecting sites and buildings contaminated
with asbestos, precautionary measures could consist in (increased) fire protection of those sites and
buildings. In this particular respect, a register of sites and buildings contaminated with asbestos might be
useful.

From the perspective of Community legislation on waste management, it is important to underline

3.
that:

(a) Council Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 of 1 February 1993 on the supervision and control of shipments
of waste within, into and out of the Community (3) defines mandatory control procedures that must be
applied to control shipments of waste between Member States. In particular, a very stringent control
procedure applies concerning disposal of waste presenting risks
to human health and the
environment, which involves prior notification of the intended shipment and prior written consent
by the relevant authorities before the shipment may take place.

(b) Council Directive 75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 (4) on waste, as amended, stipulates a number of key
obligations for Member States in connection with the management of waste, which includes asbestos
waste. Specifically, Article 4 requires Member States to take the necessary measures to ensure that
waste is recovered or disposed of without endangering human health and without using processes or
methods which could harm the environment. In particular, this must be done without risk to water,
air, soil and plants and animals, without causing a nuisance through noise or odours and without
adversely affecting the countryside or places of special interest.

In addition, Member States are specifically required under that provision to take the necessary measures to
prohibit the abandonment, dumping or uncontrolled disposal of waste.

The Commission is not aware and has not been informed of grounds to suggest that there have been
illegal shipments of asbestos waste from the Netherlands to Belgium nor that methods used to deal with
such waste lawfully shipped from the Netherlands to Belgium are in contravention of Community rules.

(1) OJ C 304 E, 30.10.2001.
(2) OJ L 263, 24.9.1983.
(3) OJ L 30, 6.2.1993.
(4) OJ L 194, 25.7.1975.

(2003/C 222 E/141)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3890/02

by Robert Goebbels (PSE) to the Commission

(13 January 2003)

Subject: Implementation of the Sapard programme in 2001

In order to prepare the applicant countries for accession, the European Union has planned various pre-
accession programmes, notably the Sapard programme, which aims to facilitate the adaptation of
agricultural structures in future Member States. The budget for the Sapard programme was EUR 520 mil-
lion in 2000 and 520 million in 2001. According to the Böge report,
‘the take-up rate for Sapard at
31 December 2001, after two years in operation, amounted to only 6,48 %’. According to the President of
the Court of Auditors, of the EUR 520 million set aside for 2001, only 9,2 % was used, of which only
EUR 1 million has in fact been spent in the applicant countries.

C 222 E/122

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

18.9.2003

The Commission:

1. Can it explain why, of the approximately EUR 60 million disbursed in 2001, only EUR 1 million has

in fact been used to finance structural aid in the applicant countries?

2. What intermediaries and other consultants have taken a share of the money? Can the Commission

provide a list of these?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(10 February 2003)

Commission payments in 2001 in the context of Sapard Programmes amounted to EUR 30 491 677.
For details, we refer you to Section 7 and relevant annexes of Sapard Annual Report 2001. The bulk of
this amount corresponded to advances paid to the beneficiary countries. These advances constitute a cash
facility to be used only to pay the Community contribution to final beneficiaries.

In accordance with the financial rules laid down in the multi-annual agreement agreed with each country,
further payments are made in respect of expenditure incurred by the Candidate country. Such
reimbursement can only be done when the Beneficary country has incurred eligible expenditure and
present the relevant claims to the Commission for reimbursement. This, in turn, is dependent on the
claims for re-imbursement of expenditure being presented by the final beneficiary in the candidate country
to the Sapard Agency. This may occur, depending on the type of project, many months after the project
has been approved, as is the case in Member States.

As reported by the Court of Auditors in its Annual report 2001, payments by the Commission relating to
reimbursement of expenditure incurred by final beneficiaries in that year were made in two countries,
Bulgaria and Estonia, and amounted to roughly one euro. The reason is that only these two had been
operating the Sapard instrument for a period long enough for the Commission to be able legitimately to
make reimbursement payments. It may be noted that by the end of 2002 reimbursement payments by the
Commission have increased almost ten fold.

The amount paid by the Commission to the implementing agencies in each country but not yet disbursed
to final beneficiaries remains in each country in the Sapard euro account (account opened under the
responsibility of the beneficiary country in a financial or treasury institution, bearing interest).

Consequently, none of
consultants’.

the EUR 30,5 million advance could be used for

‘intermédiaires et autres

(2003/C 222 E/142)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3892/02

by Marco Cappato (NI) to the Council

(13 January 2003)

Subject: Union support for the government of Sudan

During its visit to Sudan on 9/10 December 2002 a delegation from the European Troika signed an
agreement with the Sudanese Government authorising the use of initial funding to support the Khartoum
government in the technical preparation of the cooperation programmes which will resume when a
definitive peace agreement is signed.