WRITTEN QUESTION E-3549/03 by José Ribeiro e Castro (UEN) to the Commission. Cohesion Fund — Portugal.
Date: 2003-11-28
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Cohesion Fund, Portugal, economic convergence, implementation of the budget, sustainable development, transport infrastructure

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/583

Can the Commission tell me whether this explanation collaborates the total ineffectiveness of Community
measures for preventing these crimes and, in any case, state what it believes is needed in order to prevent
their present day in, day out repetition?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(15 December 2003)

Each Member State now has fairly stringent legislation in this field. National
laws partly reflect the
provisions of relevant international conventions, in particular the 1982 Montego Bay Convention on the
Law of the Sea and the Convention on the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (Marpol 1973-1978).

Following the ‘Prestige’ disaster in November 2002,
themselves the
objective, among others, of setting up a system of sanctions, including criminal sanctions for pollution
infringements, such as deliberate unlawful discharges (tank cleaning operations) and, under certain
conditions, accidental discharges.

the Community institutions set

On 5 March 2003, the Commission presented its proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and
of the Council on ship-source pollution and on the introduction of sanctions, including criminal sanctions,
for pollution offences.

With this proposal, the Commission is essentially pursuing four objectives:

(cid:1) Determine, under Community law, what constitutes an unlawful discharge of polluting substances at

sea. In this it is following Marpol definitions to the letter.

(cid:1) Guarantee that those responsible for these illegal discharges will be prosecuted and will receive
sanctions, including, where appropriate, criminal sanctions in accordance with national legislation.

(cid:1) Draw up a list of all those whose liability can be invoked, not only captains and ship owners but also

charterers, classification societies, etc.

(cid:1) Define the conditions in which the liability of each of these parties could be invoked. As regards
discharges on the open seas and in exclusive economic zones, the Commission is tied to what is laid
down in Marpol. However, as regards discharges in territorial waters, it may, in accordance with the
1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea, release the Union from Marpol, follow a more stringent line
and lay down that liability can be invoked where there is serious negligence.

This proposal for a Directive also deals with the question of the proof required to punish natural or legal
persons responsible for an illegal discharge (whether deliberate or accidental). The Commission therefore
calls on Member States to draw up ‘reliable methods for attributing pollutants detected at sea to a
particular ship’. Numerous methods are currently being developed, such as specific on-board equipment
which can automatically record unlawful substances which might be contained in discharges from ships.

The Commission attaches particular importance to this proposal and is counting on the resolute support
of the Council and Parliament which are currently examining its text.

(2004/C 78 E/0617)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3549/03

by José Ribeiro e Castro (UEN) to the Commission

(28 November 2003)

Subject: Cohesion Fund (cid:1) Portugal

The Commission has stated that the suspension of the Cohesion Fund in relation to Portugal ceased at the
beginning of this year. However, to date this normalisation of the Cohesion Fund has had few or no
effects. The Portuguese Government is making an immense effort to consolidate the budget so as to
comply with the Stability and Growth Pact. For geographical reasons, and particularly in view of the

C 78 E/584

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

current enlargement, Portugal is suffering a severe economic backlash from its peripheral location. Action
in the transport infrastructure sector is therefore of particular importance.

On the other hand, there is fortunately (cid:1) since the Gothenburg 1999 and Lisbon 2000 Summits (cid:1) the
reassuring consideration that the goals of economic and material development in the European Union
should only be pursued in obedience to sustainability criteria, i.e. the so-called environmental dimension.
For example, an ‘eco-conditionality’ criterion was introduced for the carrying out of various activities
which fell within the scope of EU powers.

In other words, transport infrastructure and the environment are two areas of prime importance for the
longed-for Portuguese convergence and the much desired social cohesion of the EU and, for that very
reason, come under the Cohesion Fund.

The Commission:

1. Can it tell me where exactly we are right now with the application of the Cohesion Fund in Portugal,

both in procedural and quantitative terms?

2. Are public reports that Portugal is in danger of losing these funds justified?

3. How many cases have been approved, to date, relative to the Commission’s expectations?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(9 January 2004)

The indicative Cohesion Fund allocation to Portugal for 2003 is EUR 478 million. To this must be added
EUR 169 million not committed by Portugal
in 2002. Thus for 2003 an indicative amount of
EUR 647 million was available for part-financing of transport and environment projects.

Of this amount the Commission committed EUR 645 million in December 2003, EUR 139 million for
12 projects accepted in previous years and EUR 506 million for 23 new projects.

We consider therefore that Portugal’s take-up of Cohesion Fund commitment appropriations is satisfactory
given that the leeway from 2002 has been made up.

(2004/C 78 E/0618)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3552/03

by Gabriele Stauner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(1 December 2003)

Subject: EU funding for research programmes in Ukraine

According to media reports, 700 children disappeared in the region of the Ukrainian city of Kharkov
between 1996 and 2003, and the whereabouts of over 300 of them is apparently still unknown. In the
‘Mona Lisa’ programme shown on 12 October 2003 on the German television channel ZDF, serious
accusations were levelled at a hospital in Kharkov, where there have been repeated instances of newborn
babies being pronounced dead and where there is a high incidence of premature births resulting in death.
A mass grave was found with fetuses and babies from which the organs had been removed.

Can the Commission therefore answer the following questions:

1.

2.

Is EU aid used to fund research programmes on embryonic or adult stem cells in Ukraine?

If so, which institutes or organisations receive the funding?