WRITTEN QUESTION E-3812/03 by Gabriele Stauner (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Tempus programme in Romania.
Date: 2003-12-11
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU programme, European Anti-fraud Office, Romania, audit, fraud against the EU, vocational training

C 84 E/250

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

the commitment to include in the national monitoring programme for 2004 milk samples as well as
samples of other foodstuffs produced in these regions. In the case where levels above the EU maximum
levels are found, appropriate measures will be taken to avoid unacceptably contaminated foodstuffs
entering the food chain.

(1) OJ L 67, 9.3.2002.
(2) OJ L 209, 6.8.2002.

(2004/C 84 E/0296)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3661/03

by Konrad Schwaiger (PPE-DE)
and Karl von Wogau (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(9 December 2003)

Subject: Imports of preserved mushrooms from China

Under Regulation (EC) No 2125/95 (1), the customs quota for imports of preserved mushrooms from
China was fixed as 22 750 tonnes annually. The quota had been at that level for a number of years
previously, and it was not raised on the accession of the new German länder, despite the addition of nearly
16 million new consumers to the single market. Nor was it raised in response to the accessions by Sweden,
Finland and Austria. This means that the quantity of imported product available for marketing to a larger
number of consumers has remained unchanged. Business opportunities for importers from the hitherto
existing Community countries have thereby been reduced.

Does the Commission agree that,

in response to the forthcoming inclusion of ten new Member
1.
countries that have hitherto covered a significant part of their needs by importing primarily from China,
it will be necessary for the quota to be raised accordingly?

2.
Does the Commission agree that when the quota is raised, an adjustment should also be granted to
make good the failure to raise the quota in response to German reunification and the accessions by
Sweden, Finland and Austria?

(1) OJ L 212, 7.9.1995, p. 16.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(9 February 2004)

In the context of the upcoming accession to the Community of 10 new Member States, the Community
will respect its General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and World Trade Organisation (WTO)
obligations as has been the case for previous Community enlargements. In particular, the Community has
notified the WTO that it is ready to enter into negotiations with WTO Members according to Article XXIV:
6 of the GATT. Article XXIV.6 negotiations are likely to take place for certain products, which may include
canned mushrooms.

The existing tariff quota for canned mushrooms has been established and is maintained in accordance with
WTO rules and there is no obligation whatsoever to increase this tariff quota in connection with past
events relating to territorial modifications of the Community.

(2004/C 84 E/0297)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3812/03

by Gabriele Stauner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(11 December 2003)

Subject: Tempus programme in Romania

On 12 November 2003, the online edition of the German magazine ‘Stern’ reported a possible case of
embezzlement of Commission funds intended for the Tempus programme in Romania. According to the

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/251

article, a well-known professor from Bucharest contacted OLAF with documents showing that vocational
training for Romanian employees, allegedly promoted by the EU, had never taken place. However,
according to ‘Stern’, OLAF neither confirmed this evidence to be true nor refuted it. Instead,
it has
apparently rejected the accusations and closed the case on the basis of an audit carried out on the orders
of Tempus itself.

1. Why did OLAF fail to acknowledge the validity as evidence of the documents supplied by the
professor in its letters to him dated 26 September 2003 and 24 October 2003?

2. Why did OLAF rely on an audit report by the Commission management of Tempus instead of
investigating the situation fully itself?

Answer given by Ms Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(11 February 2004)

The Commission informs the Honourable Member that the documents presented in support of the
complaint in question were examined in detail, as were the other items in the file sent to the European
Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF).

With the agreement of OLAF, and in line with the usual procedure in such cases, the Directorate-General
for Education and Culture asked a London-based company to carry out an anti-fraud audit, which failed to
corroborate the allegations to which the Honourable Member refers. The Commission has no reason to call
into question the independence of this audit.

After these inquiries and after consulting various European, Romanian and Belgian bodies, OLAF, when
closing the case, found no evidence of any fraud committed in connection with the programme in
question.

However, OLAF has received further information since closing the case and has decided to reopen the
investigation on a number of points. The results of this investigation will be communicated to the
competent authorities according to the usual procedure.

(2004/C 84 E/0298)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3829/03

by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(12 December 2003)

Subject: The milk quota situation after enlargement: Galicia’s production allowance

The dairy sector in Galicia is seriously concerned about what situation it will find itself in after the
enlargement of the EU. If, as a consequence of what was agreed at the time of Spain’s entry into the
Union, the current production quota for Spain, which has 40 million inhabitants, is 6 million tonnes,
making a much smaller quantity per inhabitant than in the rest of the Union, its relative position may
become much worse, since the accession countries will have a global quota of 18 million tonnes for a
population of 75 million. In Spain Galicia (cid:1) the most important dairy-farming region (cid:1) will become the
most disadvantaged region, since its overall quota will be no more than one third of that quantity.

Are these the actual figures for the accession countries? What is the production allowance for each of the
accession countries and what is the ratio between that and population? What criteria were used to
determine the quotas for each country? What possibility is there that in view of all this the production
quota for Spain and Galicia will be improved, considering, moreover, that production is now not even
enough to cover the needs of the Spanish domestic market?