WRITTEN QUESTION E-0327/04 by Dana Scallon (PPE-DE) to the Commission. County Clare and Objective I of the Structural Fund.
Date: 2004-02-10
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU regional policy, Ireland, Structural Funds, county, eligibility criteria, eligible region, less-favoured region

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/573

Infringement proceedings were initiated by the transmission of a letter of formal notice to Germany
2.
in 2003. The German authorities immediately informed the Commission of their readiness to regularise
the situation from the standpoint of EU law. According to the latest available information, the Federal
Government and the Länder are discussing the revision of the legislation in question with a view to
presenting specific proposals in early summer 2004.

3.
The Commission intends to keep up its contacts with the German authorities and press for a
reformulation of the legislation in line with EU law. If this approach fails to produce satisfactory results,
the Commission will consider further action under the infringement procedure. This could involve the
adoption of a reasoned opinion followed, if appropriate, by a referral to the Court of Justice.

(2004/C 84 E/0650)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0327/04

by Dana Scallon (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(10 February 2004)

Subject: County Clare and Objective I of the Structural Fund

I understand from the Commission’s previous correspondence that County Clare will remain eligible for
Objective 1 in transition until 2006.

However, County Clare will become part of the new North-West constituency (formerly known as
Connacht Ulster)in 2004. At that time, can the Commission confirm that the existing Connacht Ulster
counties will maintain their Objective 1 status, but County Clare will not share this status?

Does the Commission not anticipate difficulty in this situation whereby it will be the only county in the
North-West constituency not enjoying Objective 1 status, even though this county shares the same
difficulties and needs as the counties of Connacht Ulster?

Can the Commission confirm whether County Clare will continue to have a different status from the other
counties of North-West after 2006?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(29 March 2004)

The process for determining eligibility for Objective 1 support for the 2000-2006 period is set out in
Article 3, paragraph 1 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general
provisions on the Structural Funds (1). The rules mean that, once estabilished, the list of eligible regions
remains in force for the entire programming period, 2000-2006.

As the Commission indicated in response to Written Question E-3699/03 (2), the eligibility of County Clare
for Objective 1 in transition will not be affected by its inclusion in the North-West constituency for the
purpose of elections to the Parliament. The Commission can therefore confirm that the eight counties of
Cavan, Donegal, Galway, Leitrim, Mayo, Monaghan, Roscommon and Sligo remain eligible for Objective 1
until 31 December 2006 while Clare will remain eligible for Objective 1 in transition.

It is not expected that the inclusion of Clare in the North-West constituency will have any impact on the
implementation of programmes in the regions eligible for Objective 1 and Objective 1 in transition
respectively.

C 84 E/574

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

It is too early to speculate on matters of eligibility for support under the Structural Funds. In the third
report on economic and social cohesion (adopted by the Commission on 18 February 2004),
the
Commission proposes to maintain the current Objective 1 eligibility criteria for the new ‘Convergence and
competitiveness’ priority.

(1) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.
(2) OJ C 78 E, 27.3.2004.

(2004/C 84 E/0651)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0348/04

by Robert Sturdy (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(11 February 2004)

Subject: Offensive material on websites in Member States

Can the Commission confirm whether it has any jurisdiction over offensive material on websites in
Member States? There is an active paedophile organisation in Denmark which suggests that some forms of
paedophiliac activity are not dangerous abuse.

Could it also confirm whether there is Community legislation that supersedes national legislation on this
type of organisation?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(17 March 2004)

The Commission fully shares the concerns expressed by the Honourable Member about the problem of
child pornography distributed through the Internet. There is a need for continuous efforts to combat
harmful and illegal content on the Internet based on international co-operation amongst governments,
particularly law enforcement and judicial authorities, but also between governments and the Internet
industry, dedicated hotlines and non-governmental organisations to effectively tackle this horrifying
phenomenon.

Primary responsibility for dealing with illegal content (including child pornography) is with the appropriate
law enforcement and judicial authorities of the Member States, which co-operate internationally in the
fight against child pornography on the Internet on the basis of the applicable cooperation mechanisms,
either directly, or through the appropriate channels of communications, such as Eurojust, Europol and
Interpol.

The European Union has been a forerunner in the fight against illegal and harmful content since 1996,
with an approach agreed unanimously by the Parliament and the Council. The Safer Internet Action Plan
adopted by the Council and the Parliament in 1999 (1) is a major element in the Commission’s activity in
this field. It provides funding for a European network of hotlines allowing users to report illegal content,
including child pornography.

The EU strategy to combat child pornography also consists of legal instruments and practical measures
against computer crime and child pornography. These include the Council Framework Decision on
approximation of laws and sanctions in the field of sexual exploitation of children, with particular
reference to child pornography on the Internet (2), and the Council Recommendation of September 1998 (3)
on the Protection of Minors and Human Dignity and the Council Decision of May 2000 to combat child
pornography on the Internet (4).

At the beginning of 2004, the ‘International Child Exploitation Database’ feasibility study was finalised. The
study was co-funded under the STOP II Programme and run by a project group composed by experts from
several Member States. The project group has issued various recommendations, especially recommending