WRITTEN QUESTION E-2685/03 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Development of workshops in Greek technical education — Action 5.2 of the second Operational Programme for Education and Initial Vocational Training in the third CSF.
Date: 2003-09-10
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Greece, education, educational institution, financing, operational programme, teacher training, teaching materials, technical education

C 70 E/128

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

20.3.2004

Also, Commission Regulation (EC) No 728/2003 of 25 April 2003 adapting certain fish quotas for 2003
pursuant
to Council Regulation (EC) No 847/96 introducing additional conditions for year-to-year
management of TACs and quotas (2) allows a maximum of 10 % of the quota for the previous year to be
transferred to the current year.

The quota transfer requested (for zone VIII) was 1 992 tonnes in the case of Spain and 1 050 tonnes in the
case of France.

(1) OJ L 83, 1.4.2003.
(2) OJ L 105, 26.4.2003.

(2004/C 70 E/130)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2685/03

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(10 September 2003)

Subject: Development of workshops in Greek technical education (cid:1) Action 5.2 of the second Operational

Programme for Education and Initial Vocational Training in the third CSF

In Greece’s technical schools there are 13 sections with 40 areas of expertise operating at the first level of
studies and another 40 areas of expertise at the second level. In its reply to my question E-1208/03 (1),
the Commission said that ‘during the first two years of implementation of the operational programme, an
amount of EUR 4 440 000 000 was spent on the procurement of basic workshop equipment’.

Could the Commission answer the following questions:

(a) What type of workshop equipment was the above-mentioned EUR 4 440 000 000 spent on?

(b) Which areas of expertise and sectors did the above-mentioned workshop equipment cover?

(c) Since there are many different types of workshop, did the specifications under which the workshop
equipment was provided relate to basic workshop equipment per workshop (e.g. types and number) or
were there detailed specifications for the various types of workshop, approved by the Educational
Institute and the Ministry of Education?

(d) What stage has been reached in the training of trainers and the development of educational and

training tools for the specialised workshops in technical schools?

(e) Who is the final beneficiary of the project, given the fact that this has not yet been announced by the

special managing authority?

(1) OJ C 11 E, 15.1.2004, p. 166.

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(13 November 2003)

The Honourable Member is informed that the Greek authorities have provided information confirming that
the sum of EUR 4 440 000 000 for the procurement of basic workshop equipment is not, in fact, co-
financed by the Community through the operational programme ‘Education and initial vocational training’
or any other operational programme. This represents a correction to the information provided to the
Commission by these authorities in the context of the reply to the Honourable Member’s written question
E-1208/03. This means that the entire amount has been exclusively funded through the national budget.

20.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 70 E/129

The Commission, therefore, cannot comment on this expenditure and on the related workshop equipment
(questions a and b).

The only action for the development of workshops in Greek technical education is contained within the
operational programme ‘Education and initial vocational training’. Action 5.2.5 ‘Development of Technical
Vocational Education (TEE) and School Laboratory Centres (ΣΕΚ)’, of the operational programme addresses
needs in this sector with a total budget of EUR 78 000 000.

Actions will be financed within the framework of national specifications for workshop equipment.
The implementation of these actions (training of trainers etc.) has not yet begun since a final beneficiary
for the action 5.2.5 has not yet been selected. In this regard, a call for expressions of interest launched on
25 August 2003 by the Managing Authority is still pending. The delay for the submission of proposals
ended on 15 October 2003 and it is to be expected that the bid to be retained will be announced in the
near future.

(2004/C 70 E/131)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2696/03

by Heinz Kindermann (PSE) to the Commission

(2 September 2003)

Subject: Export refunds for ovalbumin

The production of egg products generates greater quantities of albumin than the European market can
absorb, while third countries have a substantial need for high-grade albumin. In order to be capable of
competing on the world market, the European egg production industry is dependent on export refunds.

Ovalbumin is regarded as a non-Annex I product (CN Code 3502) and so, for the purpose of export
refunds, is bracketed with wheat and milk products rather than eggs in shell (CN Code 0408). On account
of increased exports in the wheat and milk products sectors, the Commission recently introduced a
reduction of over 90 % for export licence applications, a reduction which also applies to ovalbumin,
although exports in that sector have not increased.

Ovalbumin accounts for a very small proportion of the total products covered by CN Code 3502, but is
very important for small and medium-sized undertakings in the egg production industry.

1. What is the Commission’s assessment of the effects on the ovalbumin sector of the measures
decided?

Is the Commission prepared to change the tariff classification of ovalbumin by reclassifying it under
2.
agricultural products, thus placing it on the same footing as other egg products such as eggs in shell, egg
yolk and whole egg (CN Code 0408)? If so, what timescale does it have in mind? If not, why not?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(26 September 2003)

Egg albumin falling under CN subheading 3502 is indeed not included in Annex I of the EC Treaty.
Together with other Non Annex I products containing cereals, sugar, milk and eggs it is however eligible
to benefit of export refunds for the amount of agricultural products of the four sectors mentioned which
are used for their manufacture.

In the Uruguay Round the Union agreed to limit its export refunds for agricultural products. These
commitments were made separately for the various agricultural product sectors and for Non Annex I
products.