WRITTEN QUESTION E-3855/03 by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE)and Paolo Pastorelli (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Airport security.
Date: 2003-12-16
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: airport, catering industry, household article, military equipment, police checks, public safety, safety standard, terrorism, traveller

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/253

What is the general tenor of the reform which the Commission is preparing? Will Article 87(3)(c) of the
EC Treaty be amended? Will subparagraph (a) remain unaltered? How will amendments to the article take
account of the problems peculiar to sparsely populated areas of northern Europe, such as the cold climate
and long distances and the consequent higher transport costs?

For example, when, as in northern Finland, a metre of ice is broken over a distance of between 500 and
1 000 km to enable merchant shipping to reach the open sea, this significantly increases GDP, but
businesses incur substantially higher costs.

The guidelines on State aid restrict the scope for national aid mainly to Objective 1 regions. In addition,
exceptions are permitted, inter alia, on account of sparse population.

How will the future reform take account of the fact that many Objective 1 regions in the current Member
States will be reclassified as Objective 2 regions? Despite this fact, such regions, many of which are rural,
need special measures to safeguard their competitiveness and prevent any continuation of the tendency
towards centralisation and towards migration of populations to economically central areas. Will the
Commission consider criteria for permitting State aid other than the classification of regions by objective
and the GDP criterion used for that purpose?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(11 February 2004)

The Commission does not intend to propose any alterations to Article 87 of the EC Treaty.

As regards the Guidelines on national regional aid (1), the Commission decided on 2 April 2003 (2) to carry
out a revision of those Guidelines in due course for the period after 2006, allowing Member States and the
Commission time to draw up, notify and approve new regional aid maps.

With respect to the specific difficulties of the sparsely populated areas referred to by the Honourable
Member, the Commission would draw his attention to the fact that the present Guidelines do contain
specific provisions for those areas even where they are not eligible for the derogation in Article 87(3)a) of
the EC Treaty. Pursuant to Article 87(3)(c) of the EC Treaty higher investment aid intensities are allowed
there than in other areas eligible for this derogation. The Guidelines, furthermore, allow transportation aid
in these areas to cover the additional cost of transporting goods, and this despite the Commission’s
generally negative attitude towards operating aid.

The Honourable Member may rest assured that in the revision of the Guidelines, which is conducted in
close co-operation with the Member States, the Commission will certainly again take into account the
specific difficulties of sparsely populated areas.

(1) OJ C 74, 10.3.1998 and OJ C 258, 9.9.2000.
(2) OJ C 110, 8.5.2003.

(2004/C 84 E/0300)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3855/03

by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE)
and Paolo Pastorelli (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(16 December 2003)

Subject: Airport security

Our lives have changed radically since 11 September 2001. Fear of terrorist attack has become part of our
daily lives and consequently public safety measures have been stepped up in our cities and in high-risk key
facilities such as airports.

C 84 E/254

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

As the present time is, unfortunately, typified by almost daily acts of terrorism, such as the attacks in
Turkey and Iraq, the safety of the public is an issue of prime concern. The following recent experience was,
therefore, instructive.

A few days ago, the authors of this question travelled to Brussels airport together. After going through the
usual check-in procedures and having our hand-luggage checked, we still had time to have a meal in one
of the restaurants in the departure lounge. We were somewhat taken aback to see that travellers could help
themselves from an array of sharp, pointed knives. Obviously, a potential hijacker could pocket one before
proceeding through the departure gate and boarding. There were no further checks of our hand luggage or
persons. A potential terrorist (cid:1) however unprepared (cid:1) would have no trouble in hijacking an aircraft.
Furthermore, we realised that if a passenger checked in electronically at the appropriate desk, nobody
would check his passport either at the initial checkpoint at the entrance to the departure lounge or at the
point where hand-luggage was checked. Consequently, a terrorist would have no difficulty getting on
board an aircraft at the airport in Brussels, the European city that is the seat of so many institutions and
offers so many targets for terrorists. So much for ‘security’.

Would the Commission state its views on this state of affairs?

Does the Commission envisage mandatory security standards for airports? If not, what does the
Commission intend to do to ensure that such standards are introduced in the interests of public safety?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(17 February 2004)

The Honourable Members raise several questions regarding aviation security. It should firstly be noted that
it is not appropriate in a reply that shall be placed in the public domain to discuss the security standards
of a specific airport. The answer shall, therefore, examine the general issues raised.

Mandatory European security standards have existed since 19 January 2003 when Regulation (EC)
No 2320/2002 of the Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2002 establishing common rules in
the field of civil aviation security (1) came into force. This has been complemented by further regulations,
one of which specifies all items that are prohibited to be taken onto aircraft in the EU.

As regards restaurants located beyond the security control points of airports,
it is the obligation that
cutlery used there shall not be considered to be dangerous. In this regard, the approach used shall be no
different to that taken towards cutlery provided on aircraft where metal knives may be permitted provided
that they are blunt.

In general, the Commission is continually reviewing Regulation (EC) No 2320/2002 and its associated
implementing rules in order to seek high levels of aviation security throughout the European Union. In this
instance, the Commission is willing to write to all Member States requesting information on the use of
metal cutlery at airport restaurants located beyond airport security screening points.

(1) OJ L 355, 30.12.2002.

(2004/C 84 E/0301)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3856/03

by Raffaele Costa (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(16 December 2003)

Subject: Contracts under the Eighth EDF

Would the Commission state the number of contracts awarded, and the number of unsuccessful projects
submitted, under the eighth EDF, and how much they were worth?