WRITTEN QUESTION P-2323/03 by Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE) to the Commission. UCLAF.
Date: 2003-07-08
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Anti-fraud Office, European Commission, European official, Eurostat, personnel administration, reassignment

13.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65 E/131

(2004/C 65 E/146)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2323/03

by Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(8 July 2003)

Subject: UCLAF

After consultations with Cocobu a number of former UCLAF staff were transferred back into the main
Commission out of OLAF.

What departments did they enter? What positions did they hold and have they held since?

Have any of these employees had previous or current connection with Eurostat?

Answer given by Mrs Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(22 September 2003)

In spring 2001, two management level officials left the Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF). In mid 2001, ten
officials were transferred to Directorate General (DG) Administration (ADMIN) for redeployment purposes.

1. What departments did they enter?

The two management level officials who left OLAF in spring 2001 went to DG Press and Communication
(PRESS) and DG ADMIN, respectively.

The other ten officials went to the following DGs: five to DG ADMIN, one to DG Taxation and Customs
Union (TAXUD), one to DG External Relations (RELEX), one to DG Regional Policy (REGIO), one to DG
Fisheries (FISH) and one to DG Agriculture (AGRI).

2.

(a) What positions did they hold?

While at UCLAF/OLAF, nine of the twelve officials were employed in the investigations section.
The three remaining officials were employed in the intelligence section, the Information Technology
(IT)-infrastructure section and as Adviser to the Director, respectively.

(b) What positions have they held since?

After spending a short period of time in DG ADMIN as Advisers, one of the two management level
officials was appointed Head of Unit in DG PRESS and the other was appointed Head of Unit in DG
ADMIN.

Of the remainder:

(cid:1) one official went to DG ADMIN before taking early retirement under the present limited ‘dégagement’

in March 2003;

(cid:1) one official went to DG ADMIN and later to DG TAXUD, where he was nominated Head of Unit in

February 2002;

(cid:1) two officials, who were Heads of Unit in OLAF, were reappointed as Heads of Unit in DG ADMIN and
DG Energy and Transport (TREN), respectively, after spending a short period of time as Advisers in
DG ADMIN.

The remaining six officials, who went to DG ADMIN, DG TAXUD, DG RELEX, DG REGIO, DG FISH, DG
AGRI continue to have Administrator status.

3.

Have these employees had previous or current connections with Eurostat?

Four of the above-mentioned officials were in the internal investigations section of UCLAF/OLAF, which
dealt, inter alia, with Eurostat matters.

C 65 E/132

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

13.3.2004

None of the twelve officials went to Eurostat upon leaving OLAF or subsequently.

The Commission wishes to inform the Honourable Member that since leaving OLAF, none of the officials
have dealt with or have current connection with matters relating to Eurostat.

The Commission also wishes to remind the Honourable Member that the Director General of OLAF is the
appointing authority for staff in OLAF.

(2004/C 65 E/147)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2325/03

by Pedro Marset Campos (GUE/NGL)
and Laura González Álvarez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(14 July 2003)

Subject: Environmental rehabilitation at Portman Bay (Cartagena, Spain)

Between 1959 and 1989, millions of tonnes of waste were dumped in Portman Bay (Cartagena, Spain),
creating a layer of slime estimated to occupy 13 m cubic metres and causing the shoreline to recede
(by 300 metres since 1957).

Experts consulted state that the waste contains sulphur, arsenic, cadmium, copper, mercury, lead and zinc.

It is clear that the Commission is aware of the situation, as the regional government of Murcia has in the
past asked for financial support from the EU for environmental rehabilitation projects for the bay.

The Portman residents’ association has expressed its concern over a new development plan for the locality
which includes no provision for the total or partial rehabilitation of the polluted areas of the bay.

Is the Commission aware of this development project at the pollution-affected Portman Bay? Has EU
funding been requested for this new project? Can the Commission state, with reference to the case in
the competent authorities are properly applying the Community environmental
question, whether
legislation?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(18 September 2003)

The Commission is aware of the situation reported by the Honourable Members.

In fact, it has already handled a complaint concerning plans to use mining waste from Portman Bay as a
filling material for the port expansion project at Escombreras, located a few kilometres from the bay, for
which the Spanish authorities had requested Community financing.

In this case, the Commission informed the Spanish authorities that the waste could not be used for the
proposed expansion, and it did not therefore grant Community aid to the project. The Spanish authorities
subsequently assured the Commission that waste from the bay would not be used for the port expansion
project. The Commission therefore closed the case.

The Commission then received a new complaint regarding degradation of the Sierra de Cartagena caused
by the old mining waste located in the bay.

During the examination of the new complaint, and following an exchange of correspondence between the
Commission and the Spanish authorities, the latter forwarded a voluminous study on the bay rehabilitation
project, with three alternatives. Whichever alternative the authorities eventually choose for
the
rehabilitation of the bay, as things stand from the legal point of view this is an old dumping site to