WRITTEN QUESTION E-2347/03 by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Deaths of immigrants drowned in the seas of the south of the EU when attempting to reach the coast in search of work and a new life.
Date: 2003-07-16
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU migration policy, cooperation policy, death, illegal migration, maritime transport, migration control, third country

C 70 E/88

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

20.3.2004

Do the Interreg subsidy rules in other Member States likewise include such provisions, which

2.
promote bureaucracy? If so, what?

3. Will the Commission take measures to put an end to unnecessary bureaucratic procedures involved
in the granting of Interreg subsidies? If not, why not? If so, what will it do?

4. Will the Commission investigate the scope for setting up one competent authority per Euregion for
the central coordination of Interreg project applications, processing and finalisation?

Supplementary answer
given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(18 November 2003)

The Community Initiative,
Interreg cofinanced by the European Fund for Regional Development,
is governed by Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions
on the Structural Funds (1).

In accordance with the rules on financial management, interim payments are made by the Commission in
order to reimburse expenditure actually paid and certified by the paying authority. There is no requirement
invoices or equivalent accounting documents to be sent to the Commission or to the
for receipts,
‘Moreover, Article 38 (6) allows for the documents which the managing authority
Managing Authority.
keeps available for the Commission to be stored on commonly accepted data carriers.’

For the ‘Grensregio Vlaanderen/Nederland’ covering two sub-programmes for the Euregio Scheldemond
and the Benelux-Middengebied, the Province of Antwerpen was designated by Vlaams Gewest as Managing
Authority for the programme, the Province of Oost-Vlaanderen as Paying Authority. The programme is
supervised by a Monitoring Committee under the chairmanship of the managing authority, which at a
meeting held on 16 December 2002, approved the Handboek Administratieve Organisatie which included
a description of the management and financial control systems.

While the Commission applies the rules set out in the regulations, it has sought to ensure that, in practice,
management is as simple as possible. To this end, the Commission adopted a Communication on the
simplification, clarification, coordination and flexible management of structural policies, 2000-2006 (2).
the new provisions and
The Member States and regions have been urged to make full use of
recommendations and to simplify their internal rules and procedures with regard to the management of
European programmes.

With regard to the possibility of having one competent authority per Euregion, the Commission must
respect the decision on the part of the responsible Member States, Belgium and the Netherlands, to submit,
according to point 22 (2) of the Interreg Guidelines, a programme ‘for a border with’ sub-programmes
‘for each cross-border region’. At the same time, it should be noted that the secretariat in Turnhout is the
single authority for the central coordination processing and finalisation of Interreg applications as far as
the Benelux Middengebied is concerned.

(1) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.
(2) C(2003)1255 of 25 April 2003.

(2004/C 70 E/091)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2347/03

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

(16 July 2003)

Subject: Deaths of immigrants drowned in the seas of the south of the EU when attempting to reach the

coast in search of work and a new life

In recent weeks, in the latest in a long line of similar incidents, hundreds of people have drowned in the
seas of the south of the EU when attempting to reach the coast in search of work and a new life. Many of
the people who died were women, some of them pregnant, and children. Regardless of the approach taken

20.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 70 E/89

to regulating the entry of immigrants (cid:1) integration, asylum, passports, management centres, repatriation,
etc. (cid:1) we are facing an extremely serious humanitarian problem which cannot leave either European
society or still less the EU institutions indifferent, and which requires an urgent solution. What political
and humanitarian measures and initiatives is the Commission taking to prevent these tragic deaths?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(26 September 2003)

As in the summer months of recent years the Union is experiencing an increasing inflow of illegal
immigrants by sea. The passage is mostly organised by ruthless criminal networks involved in the
smuggling of human beings. Despite moderate weather conditions in summer, some of the vessels used by
the criminal networks are unseaworthy, which has led to severe humanitarian tragedies.

As stated in the Commission’s reply to the written questions E-3112/02 by Mr Tannock (1), P-0291/03 by
Mr Pisicchio (2) and E-2133/03 by Mr Borghezio (3),
immigration by sea is given serious and
continuous attention within the Commission and important steps to develop a Community policy
framework have recently been taken.

illegal

Three action plans (cid:1) one on illegal immigration specifically, one on integrated border management and
one on return policy (cid:1) define Union action and a schedule for common measures in the fight against
illegal immigration. In preparation for the European Council in Thessaloniki on 19/20 June 2003, the
Commission presented the current state of play in this area (4). In addition, the Thessaloniki European
Council clarified in its conclusions the general roadmap for the ongoing activities.

In addition, the Commission has just presented to the Council a study on maritime borders which contains
a thorough analysis of the phenomenon and a number of recommendations with regard to improving ship
security in order to avoid these tragic incidents. The study considers possible developments in maritime
law as well as on improved regional co-operation, in particular in the Mediterranean context.

In addition, the Commission has responded to the increasing influx from Libya and is preparing a second
mission in close consultation with the Member States after an initial exploratory mission in May 2003.

The Commission considers also that, in order to develop an effective policy on fighting illegal migration,
co-operation with third counties is essential and will require increased attention in the coming years. In its
Communication on integrating migration issues in the European Union’s relations with third countries (5),
the Commission presented the policy approach it will take.
In this framework, the proposal for a
Regulation establishing a programme for financial and technical assistance to third countries in the area of
migration (6), and sent to the Council and the Parliament, aims to provide the financial means for such
co-operation. Once this Regulation is adopted, the Community will have a specific financial instrument to
assist third countries in their efforts to better managing migratory flows in all their dimensions, including
illegal migration.

This Regulation will be the follow-up to the pilot phase of the B7-667 budget line ‘Co-operation with third
countries in the field of asylum and migration’. In this pilot phase various projects to assist third countries
in their efforts to fight illegal migration have already started. In line with the balanced and integrated
approach as set out in its December Communication, the Community co-finances both a French and
Spanish led co-operation project with Morocco that aims to improve Moroccan border control and two
projects that aimed to strengthen local development and enhance job opportunities. The MEDA

C 70 E/90

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

20.3.2004

programme for migration management in Morocco further builds on these first projects. The Commission
intends to step up its efforts to elaborate similar migration management projects in other Northern
Mediterranean countries in full partnership with the countries concerned.

(1) OJ C 155 E, 3.7.2003, p. 92.
(2) OJ C 280 E, 21.11.2003, p. 46.
(3) See page 77.
(4) COM(2003) 323 final.
(5) COM(2002) 703 final.
(6) COM(2003) 355 final.

(2004/C 70 E/092)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2362/03

by Stavros Xarchakos (PPE-DE) to the Council

(17 July 2003)

Subject: Research by a Turkish vessel in Greek territorial waters in the Aegean

It is reported in today’s Greek press (8 July 2003) that from 4 to 19 July the Turkish oceanographic
research vessel, the Piri Reis, will conduct research in the Aegean, in particular in Greek territorial waters.
These reports state that the Greek navy has picked up an announcement broadcast by Izmir coastal radio
station concerning the ‘vessel’s oceanographic research’. According to its programme of ‘research’ the Piri
Reis (which, incidentally, belongs to Izmir University) will carry out research at a distance of up to five
nautical miles from the rocky islet ‘Kaloyeri’ in the Cyclades and at 25 other spots in Greek territorial
waters.

It should be pointed out that Turkey (an applicant country) has previously dispatched this vessel into the
Aegean with instructions to carry out research in Greek (and therefore Community) waters, thereby
causing tension in Greek-Turkish relations.

Is the Council aware of the intention of the Turkish authorities? Has the University of Izmir, which owns
the vessel in question, received funding through any Community initiative (either directly or indirectly with
loans or other Community funds)? What actions can the Council take forthwith to prevail upon Turkey
not to go ahead with research in the territorial waters of an EU Member State?

Reply

(8 December 2003)

1.
The Council has been informed that a Turkish marine research vessel had been conducting activities
in the Aegean, but has no particular information about the specific scope of these activities or on the
Turkish authorities’ intentions. The Council is not aware of the existence of Community funding for the
body owning the vessel.

As a candidate State, Turkey is required (cid:1) under the principle of peaceful settlement of disputes in
2.
accordance with the UN Charter (cid:1) to make every effort to resolve any outstanding border disputes and
other related issues, as set out
the European Council conclusions in Helsinki on
10/11 December 1999. This is, moreover, a specific priority in the revised Partnership Agreement for
Turkey’s accession.

in point 4 of

3.
Since March 2002, exploratory talks between Greece and Turkey have been taking place at the level
of senior officials of their respective Foreign Ministries. Greece and Turkey have also put in place various
sets of confidence-building measures in this area. The Council is closely monitoring progress achieved in
this connection. In line with the Helsinki conclusions, the European Council will have to review the
situation (cid:1) including its repercussions on the accession process (cid:1) before the end of 2004.

In the framework of political dialogue, the Council regularly encourages Turkey to continue making

4.
efforts to defuse and prevent tensions and to work together with Greece to that end.