WRITTEN QUESTION E-3914/02 by Juan Naranjo Escobar (PPE-DE) to the Council. Europol.
Date: 2003-01-14
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Community budget, Europol, budgetary expenditure, drafting of EU law, interinstitutional relations (EU), legal basis, terrorism

18.9.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 222 E/127

(2003/C 222 E/147)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3913/02

by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE),
Carlos Bautista Ojeda (Verts/ALE)
and Josu Ortuondo Larrea (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(14 January 2003)

Subject: Access to the Council of Agriculture and Fisheries Ministers denied to representatives of Galicia,

the Basque Country and Andalusia

Before the Council of Ministers of Agriculture and Fisheries met in Brussels from 16 to 19 December 2002
the delegations from Galicia, the Basque Country and Andalusia asked Spain’s Permanent Representation to
the European Union for a special pass for their fisheries experts, giving them access to the Council’s press
like the equivalent representatives from other
room,
countries directly affected by the issues dealt with on the agenda of that particular Council meeting. The
three delegations were not even asking for access to the Council meeting itself, but merely to the public
room where press agencies and journalists receive information directly.

to allow them to obtain information directly,

Can the Council comment on the attitude of the Spanish Government, which denied the regional
representatives of the Autonomous Regions of Galicia, the Basque Country and Andalucia access to the
Council’s press room?

Reply

(13 May 2003)

The Council has no knowledge of the events referred to by the Honourable Members and cannot therefore
comment on them.

It does stress, however, that access to the Council’s press room is primarily reserved for accredited
journalists. Representatives of professional bodies and regional delegations may also be admitted if there is
room.

For this purpose certain formalities, carried out by the relevant departments, are in place for the issue of
passes giving access to the Press Centre for a Council meeting. These formalities are based on the principle
of equal treatment within the number of seats available.

(2003/C 222 E/148)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3914/02

by Juan Naranjo Escobar (PPE-DE) to the Council

(14 January 2003)

Subject: Europol

Heading B5-822 in the 2002 EU budget contains EUR 5 million (p.m.) to provide Europol with the
necessary resources to support and coordinate Member States’ activities in the fight against terrorism and
to finance the creation of a crisis and communications centre. This amount was allocated under chapter
B0-04 (provisional appropriations) pending adoption of a legal basis which would, for the first time,
enable Europol activities to be financed directly by the European Union budget.

On the basis of the budgetary information provided by Europol, on 31 July 2002 the Commission
submitted a proposal for a Council decision making provision for a total of EUR 3 038 600.

The Council decided to consult Parliament two months later, on 8 October 2002. Parliament, for its part,
in order to allow the Council to adopt the proposal before the end of the year and to prevent the amount
allocated under the 2002 budget from being cancelled and enable appropriations to be carried over to the
2003 budget, promptly approved the Commission proposal in its legislative resolution of 5 December
2002 and forwarded it to the Council in order for it to be adopted in time.

C 222 E/128

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

18.9.2003

What are the Council’s reasons for not adopting the Commission proposal for a decision?

Given that it has allowed appropriations to be lost, does the Council believe that, contrary to Europol
estimates, the proposed funds are not necessary?

When it took its decision, did the Council take into account the opinions of Europol, the Commission and,
in particular, the Parliament on this issue? What view does the Council take of Parliament’s unanimous
agreement to apportion a part of the Community budget to finance some Europol activities?

Reply

(5 and 6 May 2003)

The Council informs the Honourable Parliamentarian that the proposal for the creation of a legal base for
allowing Community subsidies to Europol has been discussed within the Council. Several delegations were
of the view that this proposal constituted an attempt to depart from the principle enshrined in the Europol
Convention, that Europol’s budget shall be financed from Member States’ contributions, as distinct from a
financing at the charge of the budget of the European Communities.

They felt that any modification of this principle would require a modification of Article 35 of the Europol
Convention.

Against this background, the Council has not been in a position to agree on the Commission proposal for
a Council Decision on the financing of certain activities carried out by Europol in connection with co-
operation in the fight against terrorism.

(2003/C 222 E/149)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3920/02

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(14 January 2003)

Subject: Alarm caused by flocks of birds in the centre of Rome

In the last few days road accidents have been caused yet again by the devastating presence of enormous
flocks of birds in Rome.

When winter arrives the streets of Rome are invaded by groups of birds which, instead of continuing their
migration southwards, stop in cities to take advantage of the absence of predators and the higher
temperatures caused by pollution. Thousands of passerines colonise the treetops in Rome, causing
considerable inconvenience to the inhabitants because of the noise and, above all, the large quantities of
droppings on the ground.

The worst-hit areas are those where there are enough trees to attract an enormous number of birds, whose
droppings make the asphalt dangerously slippery. This has disastrous consequences for city traffic (cid:1) since
the authorities are forced to cut off the traffic and divert it elsewhere (cid:1) and the safety of motor cyclists
and car-drivers, who through no fault of their own are involved in road accidents.

In view of this problematic situation Rome City Council has arranged for the trees to be pruned and is
using decoys to send the flocks elsewhere, but these measures have proved inadequate.

Since the most effective solution in Sweden, where the flocks start
contraception, can the Commission say:

their

journey, seems to be

1. whether there are existing projects for tackling similar crisis situations and whether Rome City
Council has submitted any such project to remove the flocks, which are a danger to the safety of
urban traffic;

2. whether there are examples of good practice in this sphere in other Union countries?