WRITTEN QUESTION P-3492/03 by José Ribeiro e Castro (UEN) to the Commission. Romano Prodi — Manifesto.
Date: 2003-11-17
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Commission, President of the Commission, politics, powers of the institutions (EU), separation of powers

C 78 E/292

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

(2004/C 78 E/0292)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3489/03

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(24 November 2003)

Subject: Stepping up supplies to the Sinaga’s sugar production units (cid:1) Azores Autonomous Region

The Sinaga (cid:1) Sociedade de Indústrias Agrícolas Açorianas, S.A. (cid:1) has informed me that in July 2003, the
Azores Autonomous Region (AAR) asked for a 3 000 tonne increase in supplies of white sugar obtained
from refining raw sugar. This sugar is essential to keep the company working and save the hundred plus
jobs it provides. The increase in the quota represents less than 0,0016 % of Community production, and is
vital to the AAR, an ultraperipheral region which is one of the poorest in the EU; the social and economic
fabric is weak, and there are no real or economic alternatives.

Sinaga says that the request has not yet been answered by the Community authorities, and that it had no
reply to its letter of 7 October 2003 to Commissioner Fischler. As the request is for 2003, it is urgent that
a reply be given.

Will the Commission tell me where this request has got to? Does the Commission not think that given the
AAR’s ultraperipheral status, the quota increase requested should be provided?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(6 January 2004)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to written P-3166/03 by Mr Casaca (1).

(1) OJ C 70 E, 20.3.2004, p. 229.

(2004/C 78 E/0293)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3492/03

by José Ribeiro e Castro (UEN) to the Commission

(17 November 2003)

Subject: Romano Prodi (cid:1) Manifesto

The President of the Commission has written a text entitled ‘Europa: il sogno, le scelte’ explicitly directed
to the Italian centre-left parties, calling on them to unite in a single list for the forthcoming European
elections and act unitedly in the ensuing Parliament.

This initiative produced an immediate reaction from the Italian opposition parties, and comprehensive
criticism from the parties comprising the government majority, having already been repudiated by
representatives of European political groups. Italian political commentators have even stated that the
Commission President was positioning himself as the possible leader of the left in Italy, with a view to the
elections next June.

Can the Commission answer the following:

(cid:1) How does the Commission view the initiative taken by its President? Does it believe it to be
compatible with the nature of his duties, as set out in Article 211 et seq. of the EC Treaty? How does
it guarantee the impartiality of
its political guidelines and interventions, which are legally the
responsibility of its President? Specifically, how does it assess it in the light of the principles of
separation of powers, independence, and general interest of the Community? How does it define and
delimit what counts as ‘intervention in the internal politics’ of the Member State?

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/293

(cid:1) Is Romano Prodi going to resign as President of the Commission in order to pursue his party political
intervention in Italian politics? Or does the Commission feel comfortable with a President who
appears to have stepped directly into the disputed leadership of the left in Italy? How does it intend to
guarantee the impartiality of its acts and opinions from now on?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(16 December 2003)

The Honourable Member is referred to the discussions that
took place during the debate on the
Commission’s work programme at Parliament’s November 2003 part-session and to the remarks made by
the Commission President on the matter at hand.

(2004/C 78 E/0294)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3498/03

by José Ribeiro e Castro (UEN) to the Commission

(24 November 2003)

Subject: Iran (cid:1) nuclear energy

In a communiqué of 10 November 2003, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) announced that
the Iranian Government had accepted an Additional Protocol, granting the Agency additional powers and
inspection facilities, and had decided to suspend work on enriching and processing uranium.

The IAEA report on this issue indicates that for years, the Iranian regime disguised part of its research
programmes for years, and explored every possible avenue that would allow it to acquire nuclear weapons,
specifically by enriching uranium by centrifuge or laser, and separating plutonium, with the help of four
unidentified countries.

The Commission:

(cid:1) Does it believe that Iran meets the obligations incumbent on it as a signatory of the Nuclear Non

Proliferation Treaty?

(cid:1) How does it view the information provided to the IAEA by the Iranian regime? Does it believe that

the control measures agreed between the IAEA and Iran are adequate?

(cid:1) Does it believe that there is a need for more and better information? Does it have any further data on
nuclear activity on Iranian soil? Does it know the identity of the countries which cooperated with Iran
on nuclear programmes, and does it intend to do anything about these countries?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(20 January 2004)

The meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Board of Governors on 26 November
2003 based its discussions on the third report by Director-General El Baradei. Both the report and the
resolution adopted by the Board, confirmed a past pattern of concealment and irregularities by Iran. At the
same time, progress on outstanding issues and recent cooperation with the IAEA, were noted. The visit of
the Foreign Ministers of the United Kingdom, France and Germany and the resulting Tehran ‘Agreement’ of
21 October 2003, were welcomed.

The Commission, for its part, believes that the IAEA has managed to shed light on a number of failures
and breaches by Iran in relation to its implementation of the (Nuclear) Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)
safeguards agreement.
It, nonetheless, appreciates that Iran appears to have entered into a new and
improved phase of cooperation with the Agency.