WRITTEN QUESTION P-0157/04 by Catherine Guy-Quint (PSE) to the Commission. Twinnings with Bulgaria and Romania.
Date: 2004-01-22
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Bulgaria, EU programme, European citizenship, Romania, accession to the European Union, action programme, economic and social cohesion, twinning

C 78 E/936

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

(2004/C 78 E/0990)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0157/04

by Catherine Guy-Quint (PSE) to the Commission

(22 January 2004)

Subject: Twinnings with Bulgaria and Romania

I would like to draw your attention to the arrangements for 2004 as regards the future of twinnings
between EU countries and candidate countries. I note that twinnings with Bulgaria and Romania have been
excluded from the selection procedures described in Call for proposals No 64/03 published by the
Directorate-General for Education and Culture, when no mention of such a restriction is to be found in
any of the documents deriving from the interinstitutional work that preceded the publication of that call
for proposals. My question therefore relates both to the legal validity of that interpretation and to the
political appropriateness of these countries not being eligible to receive Community grants for twinnings.

With the aim of providing the Community action programme to promote active European citizenship
(civic participation) with the formal legal basis which the new 2002 Financial Regulation requires for
Community grants, and following the forwarding of the European Commission’s basic proposal (1) and the
European Parliament’s report (A5-0368/2003), Parliament issued an opinion on the proposal for a Council
decision on 20 November 2003. The report made no reference to the possible restriction of twinnings
with candidate countries whose accession had been confirmed for 2004. Quite the contrary, it stated that
‘As part of the enlargement of the European Union, it is essential that there should be a significant increase
over 2003 in the volume of appropriations made available to town twinning schemes.’

Furthermore, from a political perspective, it seems relevant to point to the usefulness of supporting town
twinning activities fostering active European citizenship. In the current context of extending the scope of
European citizenship to future Member States, all states should be able to benefit from these measures,
without distinction. The very large numbers of twinnings in those countries supports this view. Romania,
for example, has, since 1990, participated in over 231 twinning projects funded by the European
Commission, making for an average markedly higher than many Member States (source: Directorate-
General for Education and Culture). Why, in that case, break the continuity of something that has been
pursued for many years in terms of know-how, experience exchanges and therefore of creating a requisite
sense of European citizenship in those countries which are to accede to the Union?

As Mrs Reding stated at the ‘Golden stars of town-twinning’ awards ceremony on 14 May 2003, European
integration (at local level) would not be where it is today without the efforts and goodwill of people who
devote their time to creating partnerships with citizens and organisations from other towns and cities
across Europe. Three of the ten prizes awarded at that ceremony went to projects initiated by candidate
countries. I would therefore like to know why and on what legal bases the Commission is creating a
distinction between the candidate countries as regards eligibility for a measure that is of benefit to them
all, and whose success is widely acknowledged.

(1) COM(2003) 276.

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(13 February 2004)

The Commission entirely shares the Honourable Member’s opinion regarding the importance of town-
twinning activities involving candidate countries and in no way seeks to make a distinction between
candidate countries, nor to exclude Romania and Bulgaria, nor Turkey for that matter,
from the
possibilities offered in this field by the recently adopted Community action programme to promote active
European citizenship (civic participation).

The proposal for a Council decision presented by the Commission (1) and adopted by the Council on
26 January 2004 provides for this programme to be open to the candidate countries, and the call for
proposals EAC No 64/03 also mentions these countries as being eligible, subject to the conclusion of
agreements establishing the arrangements for their participation.

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/937

In accordance with the decisions of the Association Councils, which lay down the principles, conditions
and general arrangements for the participation of candidate countries in all Community programmes as
part of the pre-accession strategy, the specific arrangements for participation in each programme must be
the subject of a Memorandum of Understanding to be concluded between the Commission and the country
expressing an interest. Just as Community grants are subject to the adoption of the decision establishing
the programme, which alone provides the formal legal basis required by the new Financial Regulation for
Community grants, so the grants intended for candidate countries are subject to these Memoranda of
Understanding.

The same approach is followed for all candidate countries, i.e. Bulgaria, Romania and Turkey. In accordance
with the provisions of the Accession Treaty, the countries acceding in 2004 participate in the Community
programmes as Member States.

Aware of the importance of the twinning movement for the three candidate countries, even before the
adoption of the programme at Community level, the Commission has already contacted the Missions of
these countries to give them the relevant information concerning the procedures to be followed.

(1) COM(2003) 276 final.

(2004/C 78 E/0991)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0158/04

by Brice Hortefeux (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(22 January 2004)

Subject: Aviation safety

The airline disaster at Sharm el-Sheikh, where a Boeing 737 belonging to the company Flash Airlines
crashed into the Red Sea killing 148 people, underlines the urgent need to address the issue of aviation
safety.

in its vote at second reading on the safety of

On 9 October 2003,
third countries aircraft using
community airports, the European Parliament called for rapid implementation of the directive, whereas the
Council favoured a later entry into force. The crash of the Flash Airlines plane shows that we cannot and
must not wait any longer.

We must act as swiftly as possible, as we did a few months ago with the legislation concerning single-hull
tankers. A blacklist of ‘floating dustbins’ has now been drawn up. We must do the same for ‘flying
dustbins’ and ensure that the information relating to airline companies that fail to respect safety conditions
is made public.

In the light of the above, what measures will the European Commission take to prevent other disasters of
this type in the future?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(16 February 2004)

The proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the safety of third countries
aircraft using Community airports (1) should make it possible to overcome the deficiencies in the current
system of monitoring foreign airlines which were highlighted by this disaster, in particular by making
controls mandatory, by providing scope for Community action vis-à-vis undertakings or countries which
fail to comply with safety requirements and by publishing an annual report of inspections. Once this
Directive is applied by the Member States, the Commission will have detailed information on all the checks
carried out at Community airports. This information will allow the Commission to draw public attention
to undertakings which pose a high safety risk.

Directive 2003/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2003 on occurrence
reporting in civil aviation (2) provides for the improvement of accident prevention through the analysis of
events leading to aviation accidents.