WRITTEN QUESTION E-2942/03 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Multiannual Guideline Programme (MGP): cutting the size of the Community fishing fleet.
Date: 2003-10-08
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU Member State, common fisheries policy, fishing fleet

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/41

Reply

(8 March 2004)

The Council invites the Honourable Parliamentarian to refer to the relevant Council Decisions where
1.
are explained the grounds on which the EU decided to suspend certain provisions of the Cotonou
Agreement with Zimbabwe (2002), Comoros (2000), Côte d’Ivoire (2000), Fiji (2000), Haiti (2000) and
Liberia (2001). The Council always officially informs the President of the European Parliament in writing of
Council Decisions to start and end consultations under the Cotonou Agreement.

2.

The Honorary Member can find the exact text of these decisions in the following documents:

(cid:1) Council Decision of 18 February 2002 concluding consultations with Zimbabwe under Article 96 of

the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement,

(cid:1) Council Decision of 14 February 2000 concluding consultations with the Comoros under Article 366a

of the Lomé Convention and taking appropriate measures,

(cid:1) Council Decision of 25 June 2001 concluding consultations with Côte d’Ivoire under Article 96 of the

ACP-EC Partnership Agreement

(cid:1) Council Decision of 9 April 2001 concluding consultations with the Republic of the Fiji Islands under

Article 96 of the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement,

(cid:1) Council Decision of 29 January 2001 concluding the consultation procedure with Haiti under

Article 96 of the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement,

(cid:1) Council Decision of 25 March 2002 concluding consultations with Liberia under Articles 96 and 97 of

the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement.

3.
For the other cases mentioned by the Honourable Parliamentarian, the Council recalls that the
European Parliament shared the Council concern about human rights. This concern was at the original of
the delay in the signature of the co-operation agreements.

4.
The Council underlines that when speaking of the promotion and protection of human rights and
fundamental freedoms, the Union refers to a well identified set of obligations which allows action not only
at general level but also with reference to specific or individual cases, whenever requested and possible.

(2004/C 84 E/0045)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2942/03

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(8 October 2003)

Subject: Multiannual Guideline Programme (MGP): cutting the size of the Community fishing fleet

Each Community Member State has a multiannual guideline programme establishing the objectives to be
met in cutting down its fishing fleet, so as to suit the fishing effort to existing resources. In December
1997, the fourth generation of MGPs was adopted, establishing the objectives for 1997-2001. This period
was extended to the end of 2002. From 1 July 2002, subsidies for building fishing boats are no longer
possible in those segments of MGP IV failing to respect their objectives by that date.

Now that the MGPs are no longer in force, can the Commission provide details of those Member States
which have not yet met the objectives laid down in these programmes, in all fleet segments, specifying the
extent to which each Member State has met the objectives?

C 84 E/42

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(30 October 2003)

To monitor implementation of the provisions banning public aid for fleet segments not meeting their
targets from 1 July 2002, the Commission delivered a report to the Council and the European Parliament
on the intermediate results of the multi-annual guidance programmes for the fishing fleets at 30 June
2002 (1). This report identifies those segments that had not met their targets by that date.

Following completion of the fourth-generation guidance programmes (MAGP IV), the Commission also
delivered an annual report to the Council and the European Parliament on the results of the multi-annual
guidance programmes for the fishing fleets at the end of 2002 (2), which describes the results for each
Member State as regards compliance with the objectives laid down by the programmes for all fleet
segments.

Copies of these two reports will be sent to the Honourable Member.

(1) COM(2002) 483 final.
(2) COM(2003) 508 final.

(2004/C 84 E/0046)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2945/03

by Dana Scallon (PPE-DE) to the Council

(8 October 2003)

Subject: Specific programme for research

In the explanatory memorandum of the proposal for a Council Decision amending decision 2002/834/EC
on the specific programme for research, technological development and demonstration ‘Integrating and
strengthening the European research area’ (2002-2006), (1),
it is said that in the course of the ethical
review, there will be an assessment of whether a free, express and informed consent of the donors has
been obtained.

As it is intended that the stem cells for research will be obtained from early stage human embryos, can the
Council confirm:

(cid:1) who will donate the stem cells, from whom will they be harvested?

(cid:1) how will it intend to obtain consent from these human beings who will donate their stem cells, who

are not able to communicate verbally or orally at this specific stage of their development?

(1) COM(2003) 390 final.

Reply

(8 March 2004)

The Council attaches great importance to respecting fundamental ethical principles in the implementation
of the specific research programme referred to by the Honourable Member. In this respect, Council
Decision 2002/834/EC of 30 September 2002 (1)
‘Where appropriate,
participants in research projects must seek the approval of the relevant national or local ethics committees
prior to the start of the RTD activities. An ethical review will be implemented systematically by the
Commission for proposals dealing with ethically sensitive issues, in particular proposals involving the use
of human embryos and human embryonic stem cells’.

‘inter alia’,

stipulates

that,

Regarding the Commission proposal for amending the specific programme mentioned in the question, the
Council invites the Honourable Parliamentarian to refer to the conclusions adopted following its meeting
held on 3 December 2003, where the President, at the end of the discussion, concluded that no agreement