WRITTEN QUESTION E-1253/03 by Carlos Bautista Ojeda (Verts/ALE) to the Council. Crisis in the European tourist industry.
Date: 2003-04-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU policy, Iraq, economic consequence, international conflict, principle of subsidiarity, tourism policy

26.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51 E/69

Parliament and Council Directive 2000/60/EC of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for
Community action in the field of water policy (11) protects all waters including coastal waters, and sets
the objective to achieve/maintain good quality (‘good status’) by 2015 at the latest. It covers all sources of
impacts
including the disposal of waste, and is complemented by a non-deterioration clause,
i.e. deterioration of water status below present levels is as a rule not allowed. However, the information
given by the Honourable Member has not revealed any specific grounds of complaint on the application of
the abovementioned Directives to the specific case. Therefore, in the light of the above, no breach of the
abovementioned Directives can be identified at present. Should the Honourable Member provide detailed
information enabling the Commission to assess the issues in relation to the abovementioned Directives, the
Commission would also be able to investigate this matter.

With regard to possible co-financing from the Structural Funds, more details would be required on the
nature of any alternative solutions in order to assess their eligibility under the operational programme for
the region.
is the Member State which assumes general
responsibility for the implementation, follow-up and effectiveness of Structural Fund initiatives.

It should also be borne in mind that

it

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.
(2) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997.
(3) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.
(4) OJ L 194, 25.7.1975.
(5) OJ L 78, 26.3.1991.
(6) OJ L 182, 16.7.1999.
(7) OJ L 54, 25.2.1978.
(8) OJ L 378, 31.12.1982.
(9) OJ L 32, 3.2.1983.
(10) OJ L 377, 31.12.1991.
(11) OJ L 327, 22.12.2000.

(2004/C 51 E/077)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1253/03

by Carlos Bautista Ojeda (Verts/ALE) to the Council

Subject: Crisis in the European tourist industry

(3 April 2003)

At the end of 2002 the possibility of an armed conflict in Iraq put a freeze on the reserves for summer
2003 and this brought to a halt the tentative recovery which the tourist industry had been experiencing
since the middle of 2002. The outbreak of war in Iraq has only made matters worse.

This state of uncertainty may have a damaging effect on the European tourist industry and, consequently,
on the EU’s economy.

Has the Council done anything to alleviate this state of affairs and if so, what? If not, does the Council,
taking due account of the principle of subsidiarity, believe that it would be appropriate to implement a
common tourist policy so that structural and coordinating measures for an industry subject to the impact
of European-level developments can be promoted at EU level?

Reply

(29 September 2003)

The Honourable Member’s attention is drawn to the Council Resolution of 21 May 2002 on the future of
European tourism, which calls on the Commission to ‘present each year to the Advisory Committee on
Tourism a written and regularly updated note outlining the various measures envisaged by the
Commission which may affect
the tourism sector’ and for that Committee to be involved in the
monitoring of the measures proposed in the Commission communication ‘Working together for the future
of European tourism’. His attention is also drawn to the Council’s conclusions at the close of its meeting
on 19 May 2003.

C 51 E/70

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

26.2.2004

At its meeting in Brussels on 20/21 March 2003, the European Council also highlighted the importance of
tourism in its conclusions concerning measures required in order to make business more competitive and
foster entrepreneurship. In that connection the European Council pointed to the need for further efforts, at
EU and at national level, to improve the overall business environment for all sectors, including tourism
(start-ups and growth of small and medium-sized firms, reducing administrative and regulatory burdens,
etc.).

As regards steps to deal with the crisis and restore confidence in the sector, the Council would remind the
Honourable Member that it is for the Commission to propose any measures deemed necessary.

(2004/C 51 E/078)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1263/03

by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(3 April 2003)

Subject: Application of the European Union Solidarity Fund to the ‘Prestige’ disaster in Galicia and the

other regions affected

Experts have calculated that the cost of repairing the various types of damage caused by the ‘Prestige’
disaster could amount to around EUR 5 billion. This figure also corresponds to the amount (cid:1) USD 5 billion
(cid:1) demanded by the US from the company Exxon Mobil, the owner of the Exxon Valdez, which was
responsible for the disaster in Alaska in 1989. The Regulation on the European Union Solidarity Fund for
disasters, particularly natural disasters, lays down that the fund is applicable where the damage caused
exceeds EUR 3 billion. The Copenhagen European Council applied the Fund without taking this into
account, but only for a sum of EUR 5 million.

Has the Council analysed the application of the Solidarity Fund in Galicia and the other regions affected,
taking account of the actual level of damage caused and the above reference calculation, which exceeds
EUR 3 billion? Has it received a corresponding proposal from the Commission?

Reply

(29 September 2003)

On 11 November 2002 the Council adopted Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002 establishing the European
Union Solidarity Fund.

This instrument is intended for regions concerned by major disasters, by providing financial assistance to
contribute to a rapid return to normal living conditions in the disaster-stricken regions. The assistance
should mainly be mobilised in case of natural disasters.

Article 4 of the Regulation lays down the procedure for applying for assistance from the Fund. This
procedure is conducted exclusively by the European Commission in consultation with the budgetary
is consequently not involved in the procedure for granting assistance to the
authority. The Council
applicant Member State, and the final decision is accordingly a matter for the Commission alone. In this
connection the Council would refer to the Commission communication entitled ‘Report to the European
Council on action to deal with the effects of the “Prestige” disaster’, which was sent to the Council on
10 March 2003 in accordance with the Presidency conclusions of the Copenhagen European Council.