WRITTEN QUESTION E-0728/04 by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission. Ansaldo-Breda: possible monitoring of EU funding.
Date: 2004-03-11
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU financing, EU programme, European Regional Development Fund, Italy, aid to undertakings, competence of the Member States, financial control

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88 E/523

As regards ethnic minorities in particular, Latvia was strongly encouraged to promote the integration of
the Russian minority by, in particular, continuing to accelerate the speed of naturalisation procedures, and
by taking other proactive measures to increase the rate of naturalisation. Since then, several further steps
have been taken to ease the process and the rate of applications for naturalisation has doubled.

As regards the freedom of travel, it falls to the competence of Member States to decide whether holders of
non-Latvian passports are exempted from visa requirements or not. After accession, Member States will be
able to continue to waive visa requirements for holders of non-citizen passports. Once a member of
Schengen, non-citizens will be able to travel to the Schengen area on the basis of their passports and a
residence permit without applying for a visa.

(1) COM(2003) 675 final.

(2004/C 88 E/0536)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0728/04

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

Subject: Ansaldo-Breda: possible monitoring of EU funding

(11 March 2004)

At the meeting last week in Brussels involving trade union delegations and workers from Ansaldo-Breda, it
emerged that the company has benefited from assistance supporting production activities in depressed
areas of Italy, as provided for in Italian Law No 488/92, in the form of EU cofinancing. Specifically,
funding has been made available for work on replacing the company’s roof with eternit (asbestos lumber),
so as to bring the workplace up to European standards in terms of safeguarding and protecting workers.

However, it would not appear that funding was requested to provide environmental protection for the
surrounding area, despite the presence of an important acquifer in the vicinity of the establishment.

Can the Commission answer the following:

1.

In view of the above, can the Commission state whether Ansaldo-Breda has received funding and, if
so, what kind?

2. What instruments can be adopted to check whether any funding awarded to Ansaldo-Breda has

actually been used?

Supplementary answer
givcn by Mr Barrot on behalf of the Commission

(22 June 2004)

In the 1994-1999 and 2000-2006 programming periods the European Regional Development Fund has
part-financed action under Italian Law 488/92 to strengthen the industrial fabric of eligible areas.

The action part-financed includes investments by the enterprises mentioned by the Honourable Member in
restructuring, modernisation and enlargement of industrial premises in the regions of Apulia, Basilicata,
Campania and Sicily. A table giving the detailed information sent by the Italian authorities will be sent
direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament’s secretariat.

Ansaldo Breda is also participating in four research projects under the 5th Research and Technological
Development Framework Programme (assistance granted EUR 867 617) and in two research projects under
the 6th Framework Programme (assistance granted EUR 822 115).

C 88 E/524

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

8.4.2004

Provision of that assistance falls under the authority of the Italian Government, which as managing
authority for
is responsible for selecting and
monitoring the individual projects. For more detailed information the Honourable Member should
therefore approach the national authorities.

the programme (Ministry for Production Activities)

Where Community measures with decentralised management are concerned, the Commission normally
confines itself to system checks and on-the-spot sample checks.

(2004/C 88 E/0537)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0733/04

by Giuseppe Di Lello Finuoli (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(4 March 2004)

Subject: European cofinancing of

the Gazzi-Annunziata tramline in Messina under

the Multifund

Operational Programme 1994-1999

Judging from the statements made in the Sicilian press by politicians and those involved in the project, it
would seem that Community funding for the construction of the Gazzi-Annunziata tramway in Messina
was not forfeited since the facility was completed before 31 March 2002.

While I would like to accept as complete a construction project that required various interventions after
the above date in order to bring the service into operation, and on which work continues on some urban
sections still to be restored to service, could the Commission honour my legitimate right to information on
public works by indicating:

(cid:1) whether Community cofinancing was actually granted;

(cid:1) how it views the significant change in respect of the route of the original project;

(cid:1) whether it can confirm acceptance of the ruling by the Catania Regional Administrative Court, which
on 6 July 1996 upheld the appeal by Messina Municipal Council against the need to submit an
environmental
impact assessment and ordered the responsible authorities to release the European
funding that should be granted by the Regional Government?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(29 April 2004)

The Commission confirms that the project referred to by the Honourable Member was part-financed under
the 1994-1999 Multifund Operational Programme (MOP) for Sicily. One of the requirements for such
part-financing is that the project is complete and in operation by the final date laid down in the decision
adopting the programme. In its final report on the Sicilian MOP the managing authority states that these
requirements were met.

Under the subsidiarity principle it is the national authorities that have prime responsibility for ensuring
compliance with Community laws and regulations. Sicily Region was responsible for selecting and
monitoring implementation of the projects funded under the 1994-1999 MOP.

The Commission agreed with the ruling of the regional administrative court (Tribunale Amministrativo
Regionale) of 6 July 2001 that there was no need for an environmental impact assessment for the project.