WRITTEN QUESTION E-1329/03 by Sérgio Marques (PPE-DE) to the Council. Prestige: Community aid.
Date: 2003-04-08
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU waters, International Maritime Organisation, degradation of the environment, fund (EU), indemnification, oil pollution, supplementary financing

26.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51 E/75

More than ten years after the end of the civil war that divided the country, the conflict in Transnistria
remains unresolved. Large stockpiles of arms and ammunition remain in Transnistria and the region has
become a source of and a transit route for illegal trafficking. Thus, a rapid and sustainable solution to the
Transnistria conflict is all the more important. Failure to resolve it is the single largest impediment to
Moldova’s political and economic development and one of the root causes of poverty. The Council has
reiterated the readiness of the EU to contribute constructively to a political settlement and its commitment
to make additional efforts in the OSCE framework to reach a peaceful solution in full respect of Moldova’s
territorial integrity.

The Council has continuously urged the parties to the conflict to further the negotiations with a view to
finding a solution as soon as possible. The leadership of the secessionnist Transnistrian region has been
obstructionist and shown unwillingness
thereby impeding meaningful
negotiations. Consequently, the Council decided to implement targeted sanctions in the form of a travel
ban on seventeen people of the Transnistrian leadership considered to be primarily responsible for the lack
of co-operation to promote a political settlement of the conflict. Additional measures could be considered
at a later date in light of further developments.

to change the status quo,

In line with the view of the current OSCE chairmanship on the need for increasing pressure on the
Transnistrian Leadership to make progress in the negotiation process, the US, all the Acceding States,
Associated European countries and members of the EEE also decided to adopt similar measures. These
measures underscore the decisiveness of the EU and its partners in bringing the Transnistrian leadership in
result-oriented negotiations.

The Council underlines that a sustainable solution to the situation of Transnistria requires good will by all
sides. The Council has also called on the Moldovan side to take the most constructive and flexible
approach to suggestions submitted by the mediators. The Council welcomed the recent initiative by
President Voronin on a new constitution and the recent establishment of a constitutional drafting
commission with equal representation of both sides. While continuing to support the negotiating process
under the current five-sided format, the EU encourages this new initiative and would be willing to facilitate
the work of the constitutional drafting commission as appropriate.

The Council is working actively with all parties to seek a lasting solution and is also ready to examine all
measures helping to promote a political settlement of the conflict. In addition to existing assistance to
Moldova, the Council will assess, within the context of available resources, what measures could form part
of a package to support an eventual settlement of the Transnistria conflict, contributing to increasing
stability and security and to reviving economic development in the whole region on a sound basis.

(2004/C 51 E/085)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1329/03

by Sérgio Marques (PPE-DE) to the Council

(8 April 2003)

Subject:

‘Prestige’: Community aid

The sinking of the ‘Prestige’ off the Galician coast in 19 November 2002, caused one of the largest-ever
ecological disasters, with appalling economic and social consequences for a massively fisheries-dependent,
and hence fragile, Objective 1 region.

This disastrous accident, which did not affect Portugal solely and simply because of sea-currents, once
again raised the issue of safety at sea and how to control transport of hydrocarbons. The issue is of
fundamental concern to a country like Portugal, with an immense coastline and extremely vulnerable
islands like Madeira and the Azores.

Following the wreck, the Commission presented a Communication on stepping-up safety at sea, providing
for: earlier application of the measures in the ERIKA I package (measures on port State control of vessels,
closer monitoring of the performance of the classification societies and bringing forward the timetable for

C 51 E/76

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

26.2.2004

withdrawing single-hull oil tankers from service), and the ERIKA II (measures on earlier establishment of
the European Maritime Safety Agency and compensation for victims of oil spillages), greater international
intervention and the introduction of sanctions, for pollution crime, including penal sanctions.

The European Parliament demanded that the Council adopt ‘without further delay’ a common position on
the proposal for the establishment of a Fund for the Compensation of Oil Pollution damage in European
Waters, in paragraph 9 of its resolution of 19 December 2002. Can the Council answer to the following
questions:

1. What is its position on this?

2.

3.

If no decision has yet been taken, when will a position be adopted?

If there are obstacles to establishing the Compensation Fund in question, what is the nature of these
obstacles, and in what do they consist?

Reply

(29 September 2003)

In the framework of the ‘ERIKA II’ package, the Commission submitted a proposal aimed at establishing an
EU supplementary compensation fund for oil pollution damage (COPE fund). However, in December 2000,
the Council considered it preferable to ‘ensure a proper and, as far as possible, global regime for liability
and compensation in cases of pollution damage resulting from contamination by petroleum products and
other noxious and hazardous substances transported by ships’. It consequently agreed, in April 2001, on a
common approach for negotiations within the IMO framework. The common approach emphasised that
‘an agreement within the IMO on an optional supplementary compensation fund should be reached as
soon as possible, preferably by 2003’.

On 6 December 2002, the Council (Transport/Telecommunications/Energy) agreed in its conclusions on
the safety of ships and pollution prevention, to examine immediately the Commission’s proposal for a
regulation on the establishment of a Community fund for the compensation of oil pollution damage in
European waters (COPE fund), in the event that a supplementary compensation fund for oil pollution was
not established by the International Maritime Organization (IMO), with the aim of establishing it before the
end of 2003. This was confirmed by the European Council on 20/21 March 2003.

The Diplomatic Conference held in London from 12 to 16 May 2003 decided to create a new ceiling for
the IOPCF Compensation Fund, in line with the strategy decided by the Council in its conclusions on the
subject in December 2002.

(2004/C 51 E/086)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1331/03

by André Brie (GUE/NGL) to the Council

(9 April 2003)

Subject: Minefields on the (eastern) border between Greece and Turkey

As a follow-up to the Council’s answer (E-2960/02 (1), 20 February 2003) to my question on minefields on
the (eastern) border between Greece and Turkey, I should first of all like to draw the Council’s attention to
the following report which appeared in the 26 March 2003 edition of the Athens daily newspaper
Kathimerini:

Yesterday an illegal immigrant from Somalia was killed when he stepped on a mine in an attempt to
enter Greece from Turkey through the Evros region in Thrace. The man, whose identity was not made
public, entered a fenced, signposted minefield along with a second Somali, who was injured, the army
said. Another 18 Somalis were arrested on the fringes of the minefield.