WRITTEN QUESTION P-0065/03 by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Commission. Funding for Guatemala.
Date: 2003-01-15
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU financing, Guatemala, cooperation policy, transport infrastructure

6.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 33 E/33

industry. However, this time it was not a global merger, but a series of national mergers and the
Commission paid particular attention to the specifics of each national market. The transactions were
cleared mainly on the basis that, in any case, Andersen would not be able on its own to keep its large
customers. Therefore, the mergers, on its own, would not impact the possible worsening of competition
resulting from the loss of one of the Big Five auditors.

The Commission has not found any anti-competitive behaviour in this market. It will, however, continue
to pay attention to developments in this industry.

5.
The Commission Recommendation 2002/590/EC of 16 May 2002 (cid:1) Statutory Auditors’ Indepen-
dence in the EU: A Set of Fundamental Principles (1) features a set of demanding, high level principles and
in particular recommends that auditors should be prohibited from carrying out a statutory audit (cid:1) one
required by law (cid:1) if the auditors have any relationship with their client that might compromise the
auditor’s independence. This may include any financial, business, employment or other link, or any
situations where the auditors provide to the same client services additional to the audit.

services’ by auditors and their

The Recommendation deals with two key independence issues raised by the collapse of Enron, namely
‘employment with the audit client’. The
‘provision of additional
Recommendation also recommends a rotation of auditors every seven years. Although the Recom-
mendation is not legally binding, it will serve as a clear benchmark of good practice that the Commission
expects to be immediately applied throughout the Community’s audit industry. In 2005 the Commission
will review how the Recommendation has been applied in practice and will consider whether binding
Community legislation may then be required. However, the Commission may act earlier if it is not satisfied
with Member States’ application of the Recommendation.

(1) OJ L 191, 19.7.2002.

(2004/C 33 E/030)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0065/03

by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Commission

(15 January 2003)

Subject: Funding for Guatemala

in the shortage of roads and facilities to ensure traffic safety are
The serious problems inherent
jeopardising the safety of the inhabitants of large cities (a study carried out in Quetzaltenango, the second
largest city in Guatemala, revealed a sharp increase in the number of road accident victims) and adversely
affecting the government of the country, which needs to find large amounts of funding to rebuild basic
urban infrastructure. Can the Commission say how much of
the funding provided under existing
cooperation programmes, in particular the PRRAC (Regional Programme for the Reconstruction of Central
America), has been given to the government of Guatemala and how much of its allocation is still available?

Answer given by Mr Chris Patten on behalf of the Commission

(5 February 2003)

From the outset, aside from development issues the Commission’s cooperation work with Guatemala has
concentrated mainly on the need to achieve peace and democracy in a country gradually emerging during
the 1990s from a major civil war that lasted for more than thirty years.

Since 1997 the main objective of Community cooperation with Guatemala has been to support
implementation of the peace agreements signed in December 1996. Specifically, this has involved, inter
alia, projects to help with reintegrating demobilised armed forces into the social
fabric, providing
assistance to refugees, setting up a civil police force, creating a national land register and strengthening the
judiciary. These objectives were also set as priorities in the ‘2002-2006’ strategy paper for Guatemala

C 33 E/34

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

6.2.2004

adopted by the Commission in May 2002. The Commission has allocated an indicative amount of
EUR 93 million to Guatemala for financial, technical and economic cooperation from 2001 to 2006.

In this context, investments in public infrastructure (rural roads, schools, water supply systems, etc.) are a
minor component of Community action in Guatemala, with the exception of the regional programme for
the reconstruction of Central America (RPRCA). Other donors, such as the EU Member States, the World
Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank, are the main contributors of international cooperation
funding for major public infrastructure works in Guatemala.

Under the RPRCA, the Commission has provided funding of an overall value of EUR 18,5 million for
Guatemala for the period up to the end of 2006. It should be noted that RPRCA action in Guatemala has
concentrated on the parts of the country that suffered most damage from Hurricane Mitch (principally
Izabal and las Verapaces), and the Quetzaltenango region was not considered for the reconstruction
programme. The bulk of these resources (cid:1) a total of EUR 16 million (cid:1) was allocated to three major
projects currently underway:
two for the health and education sectors and the third, under the
management of the United Nations Development Programme, for water and sanitation.

In addition,
ten small-scale projects covering the sectors referred to above, have been planned in
collaboration with European and Guatemalan NGOs (non-governmental organisations). Four of them are
already underway and the Commission is in the process of signing contracts for the other six.

Apart from these operations, the Commission is not planning to provide other funding for new initiatives
under the RPRCA. As to expenditure, of the EUR 18,5 million provided for Guatemala, EUR 3,3 million
has already been disbursed (in December 2002).

At the beginning of 2003 total funding from all budget lines available for Guatemala amounts to
approximately EUR 100 million, including the funds for the RPRCA.

(2004/C 33 E/031)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0095/03

by Olivier Dupuis (NI) to the Commission

(28 January 2003)

Subject: Child pornography

In his answer of 25 June 2002 to question E-1450/02 (1), Commissioner Vitorino stated that
‘the
Commission (had) decided to support the project “International Child Exploitation Database Feasibility
Study”, under the STOP II Programme Committee’ and that ‘this project (aimed) to assess the feasibility of
an international database with images of child sexual exploitation, sourced from the Internet or any other
pictorial systems’.

In his reply Commissioner Vitorino also pointed out that ‘Europol, as well as the other Member States,
Interpol and the group of eight most industrialised countries (was) fully associated to the project’ and that
‘the final report (was) expected for December 2002’.

Can the Commission provide information on the final report of the ‘International Child Exploitation
Database Feasibility Study’? What is the Commission’s assessment of the feasibility study on the creation of
an ‘international database with images of child sexual exploitation, sourced from the Internet or any other
pictorial systems’? Does the Commission plan to move on to the operative phase of the creation of the
database, and if so, when does it plan to begin?

(1) OJ C 28 E, 6.2.2003, p. 107.