WRITTEN QUESTION P-0165/03 by Paul Lannoye (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Guided bombs.
Date: 2003-01-24
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU Member State, arms control, arms policy, military equipment, uranium, weapon of mass destruction

9.10.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 242 E/101

(2003/C 242 E/102)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0157/03

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(29 January 2003)

Subject: Alterations to a radar installation on the island of Madeira

With reference to Mrs Wallström’s answer dated 4 November 2002 to my Written Question E-2734/02 (1)
on the construction of a radar installation on Pico do Areeiro, on the island of Madeira, what is the
Commission’s position on the announcement that the above radar installation is still to be located in the
same area, only a matter of metres away from the site previously planned, bearing in mind that this minor
alteration still poses all the disadvantages of the earlier plan?

(1) OJ C 110 E, 8.5.2003, p. 96.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(5 March 2003)

Further to its answer to Written Question E-2734/02 by Mrs Figueiredo (1), the Commission can inform
the Honourable Member that it has since been able to register the case as a complaint and question the
Portuguese authorities about the situation.

At a meeting with the Commission, the Portuguese authorities were able to give a number of clarifications
regarding the project. They explained that the radar project had been imposed by NATO and that the
nature of the installation was such that it could only be located on one of the two highest peaks on the
island (cid:1) Pico Ruivo and Pico do Areeiro. The Pico Ruivo option was rapidly abandoned, given the obvious
adverse impact. The Pico do Areeiro area was chosen because other constructions and telecommunications
installations are already located there. The Portuguese authorities also indicated that the radar’s radiation
field would not reach the nesting site of Pterodroma madeira, being located well above it.

In any event, the project has been made subject to an environmental impact study, whose conclusions are
still pending. Lastly, the Portuguese authorities indicated that they would send the Commission a copy of
the impact study.

The Commission will wait to receive the study before pronouncing on the situation.

(1) OJ C 110 E, 8.5.2003, p. 96.

(2003/C 242 E/103)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0165/03

by Paul Lannoye (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(24 January 2003)

Subject: Guided bombs

The new generation of guided bombs developed in the United States has been designed to penetrate and
destroy reinforced underground targets. On the basis of purely military logic, the high density metal used
to make these weapons as effective as possible is depleted uranium. Are weapons of this type produced in
the European Union? If not, are they available to the armed forces of certain Member States?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(13 February 2003)

The Commission has no legal competence to intervene in the choice and nature of arms to be produced or
even monitor the use of such munitions.

C 242 E/102

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

9.10.2003

the Honourable Member may wish to seek
Given the military character of
supplementary information from the Secretariat General/High Representative for Common Foreign and
Security Policy, Mr Solana.

the written question,

(2003/C 242 E/104)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0175/03

by Lousewies van der Laan (ELDR) to the Commission

Subject: EU support for maintaining biological diversity

(30 January 2003)

Technological developments such as selection and genetic modification have led to the development of
high-yielding agricultural crops which are becoming increasingly widespread throughout the world. As a
result, the diversity of agricultural crops is decreasing as traditional local crops are disappearing. However,
this also poses a threat to the genetic data of these ‘ancient crops’.

It would, however, be of great benefit to future generations if there continued to be the greatest possible
diversity of crops as their genetic data is an important source for creating new crops. In the future, climate
change and changing economic, social and environmental circumstances will continue to require new
crops with new characteristics. It is thus of literally vital importance that old crops should survive.

An organisation such as De Oerakker (Foundation for biodiversity in agriculture) in the north of the
Netherlands collects seeds from as many different crops as possible. Some species can be kept in deep-
freeze cells at the Agricultural University of Wageningen, whereas others have to be sown and harvested
each year. The foundation has managed this very successfully so far but it can no longer continue to do so
on financial and human resources grounds (it is staffed by volunteers).

Does the Commission share my view that maintaining the genetic data of old crops is extremely

1.
important for future generations?

Does it agree that this matter is of such great importance to society that it is essential to have an

2.
approach that will guarantee continuity?

3. What possibilities are there at European level to support projects of this kind, be it in financial or
organisational terms, through exchanges with similar projects elsewhere in Europe, or otherwise?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(13 March 2003)

The Commission regards biological and genetic diversity in agriculture as essential to the sustainable
development of agricultural production and rural areas. Council Regulation (EC) No 1467/94 of 20 June
1994 on the conservation, characterisation, collection and utilisation of genetic resources in agriculture (1)
made it possible to carry out an initial programme spread over the period 1994-1999 relating mainly to
ex situ conservation of genetic resources. This approach constitutes a key element of any strategy to
conserve biodiversity to the extent that it enables safeguarding of older local varieties relatively neglected
by farmers for food production. Thanks to the work undertaken by the institutions responsible for
conserving genetic material, the data and genetic characteristics of these local varieties have been preserved
and enhanced. Their conservation is essential to the future of modern agriculture.

In accordance with the recommendations contained in the report (2)
to the Commission by the
independent expert group on the implementation of Regulation (EC) No 1467/94, the Commission
drafted a new Regulation which has been discussed on several occasions in the relevant bodies at the
Council and Parliament. In the light of those discussions, the Commission is amending its proposal with a
view to presenting it again during the first half of 2003.