WRITTEN QUESTION E-3505/03 by Hiltrud Breyer (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Information on the level of EU funding granted to Saarland between January 1997 and December 2002.
Date: 2003-11-24
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU aid, EU programme, Saarland, aid system, cross-border cooperation, fund (EU), use of aid

C 78 E/820

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

The Commission has already looked into the matter raised by the Honourable Member and found no
evidence of any breach of the Directive in this specific case. The fact that the Italian Government replaced
23 of the 26 members of the Commission in charge of delivering an opinion on the project and that,
subsequently, that Commission approved the project, does not represent a breach of Directive 85/337/EEC
as amended.

The Commission can confirm that as the project does not form part of the trans-European transport
network it does not qualify for any co-financing from the TEN-T budget.

(1) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997.

(2004/C 78 E/0872)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3488/03

by Albert Maat (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(24 November 2003)

Subject: Statements by individual Commissioners against Commission policy

The Netherlands’ Commissioner recently spoke out in the Dutch press against European agriculture policy,
recently reformed on the basis of a Commission proposal.

Is it possible for serving Commissioners to oppose Commission policy in public?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(19 February 2004)

As the Commission has frequently recalled in replies to written and oral questions by Members of
Parliament (1), the Members of the Commission are politicians carrying out a political function who, while
honouring the obligations imposed by this function, remain free to express their personal opinions quite
independently and on their own responsibility.

As regards outside activities, the Code of Conduct for Commissioners states that ‘Commissioners may be
active members of political parties or trade unions, provided that
this does not compromise their
availability for service in the Commission.’

In the case referred to by the Honourable Member, the comments of the Commissioner responsible for the
internal market should be regarded as falling within the above definition and should not therefore be
interpreted as impairing the principle of collegiate responsibility.

(1) See for example, the answers given by the Commission to Questions 2459/99, 2600/99 and 2628/99, OJ C 225 E,

8.8.2000 and the answer to Question 2629/99, OJ C 46 E, 13.2.2001.

(2004/C 78 E/0873)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3505/03

by Hiltrud Breyer (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(24 November 2003)

Subject: Information on the level of EU funding granted to Saarland between January 1997 and December

2002

For what measures was EU funding granted to Saarland between 1997 and 2002, and what were the

1.
sums involved from:

(a)

the European Social Fund;

(b)

the Fifth Framework Programme for Research;

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/821

(c)

the European Regional Development Fund;

(d) EU environmental and energy programmes;

(e)

the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (Guidance Section and Guarantee Section);

(f) other EU programmes?

How much was paid from the individual programmes and funds for cross-border projects involving

2.
Saarland and, respectively, Luxembourg, Belgium and Lorraine?

Supplementary answer
given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(4 March 2004)

In view of the length of its answer, the Commission is sending it direct to the Honourable Member and to
Parliament’s Secretariat.

(2004/C 78 E/0874)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3513/03

by Adriana Poli Bortone (UEN)
and Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Commission

(25 November 2003)

Subject: Water

Could the Commission say whether any (and, if so, how many) of the Member Sates have so far complied
with Article 24 of Directive 2000/60/EC (1)? Will the Commission be able to report to Parliament by
January 2004? In 2002, did the Commission submit to the Regulatory Committee the plan referred to in
Article 19 of the Directive, and what effect has that plan had as regards a possible resolution (cid:1) or, indeed,
action (cid:1) in respect of the rules relating to water?

(1) OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, p. 1.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(19 January 2004)

Article 24 of the Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of
23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy, requires the
transposition of the Directive into national legislation by 22 December 2003. The 10 Acceding Countries
will have to complete transposition of the Directive by the date of accession.

The Commission will report on the state of transposition and notification shortly after the deadlines have
passed. The Commission will initiate legal proceedings on ‘non-communication’ for those countries which
do not give notification in time.

the Water Framework Directive requires the Commission to inform the
Article 19 paragraph 1 of
Committee established under Article 21 of an ‘indicative plan of measures having an impact on water
legislation which intends to propose in the near future,
including any emerging from the proposals,
control measures and strategies developed under Article 16’. On 6 May 2003, the Commission reported to
the first meeting of the Committee on the state of development of the Daughter Directives on priority
substances (Article 16) and groundwater (Article 17). The documents for the Committee meeting were sent
to Parliament through the regular transmission routes.

In addition to the formal reports to the Committee, the Commission is working closely with the Member
States, the Candidate and European Economic Area (EEA) Countries, stakeholders, non-governmental
in the
organisations (NGOs) and other organisations,

including the European Environment Agency,