WRITTEN QUESTION P-1916/99 by Wolfgang Kreissl-Dörfler (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. EU Development aid programmes in Mozambique.
20. 6. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 170 E/123 The Commission intends to hold scientific seminars for each of the biogeographical regions, 2. conjunction with the European Topic Centre for Nature Conservation. in The procedure for these seminars and the lists of participants were adopted in consultation with the Member States. The aim is to assess the national lists of sites on the basis of the best scientific information available. The Commission therefore relies on the scientific expertise available, but it should be noted that Council Directives 79/0409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds (1) and 92/0043/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and wild fauna and flora (2) do not lay down definitive statistical criteria for taking a decision on each individual site. The European Topic Centre for Nature Conservation is part of the European Environment Agency. 3. The Commission is not involved in recruitment to or the allocation of tasks within the Topic Centre. According to the Commissionís information, three people are working on the assessment of scientific data for the Natura 2000 network within the Topic Centreís central team. 4. The European Environment Agency is responsible for collecting scientific data. for its part, the Commission sends the Topic Centre all the data in its possession: co-financed scientific studies, inventories carried out in the context of Life-Nature projects, information provided by non-governmental organisations (NGOs), etc. , and urges the Member States to communicate all the data in their possession. The Commission would point out that some Member States did not wish to communicate their national inventories of sites containing natural habitats or species of Community interest or did not indicate all the habitats or species that are in fact present in the sites proposed for Natura 2000. 5. On several occasions the Commission has impressed upon the Agency and the Topic Centreís Steering Committee the importance of scientific assessment for Natura 2000 and of strengthening the Topic Centreís central team accordingly. 6. The Agencyís Management Board is responsible for evaluating the Topic Centre. The Commission, which, like Parliament, has two representatives on the Board, would willingly take part in an evaluation of the resources needed by the Natureí Topic Centre. (1) OJ L 103, 25. 4. 1979. (2) OJ L 206, 22. 7. 1992. (2000/C 170 E/146) WRITTEN QUESTION P-1916/99 by Wolfgang Kreissl-Dörfler (Verts/ALE) to the Commission Subject: EU Development aid programmes in Mozambique (14 October 1999) Could the Commission explain why EU development aid programmes in Mozambique were suspended for a period of several months at the beginning of this year, which had the effect of endangering whole programmes and diplomatic relations? Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission (9 November 1999) The question must be based on a misunderstanding. The Commission has not taken any decision in 1999, or indeed in recent years, to close, or otherwise suspend, development aid to Mozambique. C 170 E/124 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 20. 6. 2000 Currently, implementation of development aid programmes in Mozambique has been progressing accord- ing to plan. During the first semester of 1999, the Commission approved two new programmes amounting to € 25,8 million. There has been no particular problem with the Mozambican authorities during the period mentioned by the Honourable Member. On the contrary, relations have improved, allowing for the Mozambican authorities to be very much involved in the definition, planning and implementation of the aid programmes. The Honourable Member might wish to note, as well, that funding from the Community to Mozambique is presently at a high level. Indeed, disbursements in 1998 reached € 91 million, whereas forecasts for 1999 and 2000 are presently set at € 132 million and € 127 million. (2000/C 170 E/147) WRITTEN QUESTION P-1917/99 by Marco Pannella (TDI) to the Council (15 October 1999) Subject: Custody and repatriation detention practices in China Each year in China hundreds of thousands of people from the most disadvantaged backgrounds including street children, the homeless, those suffering from mental illness and migrants, are arbitrarily arrested and held without specific charge or trial. This repressive practice, known as custody and repatriation, became even more widespread in the weeks leading up to the 50th anniversary of the Peopleís Republic of China. People may be held for several months in appalling conditions. Prisoners are subject to constant physical violence, live in disgraceful sanitary conditions, work extremely long hours and are held in almost complete isolation. In addition, they must pay the costs of their detention in the custody and repatriation centres. What measures has the Council taken or does it intend to take to ensure that the Chinese authorities put an immediate end to this form of administrative arrest which is contrary to the spirit and the letter of international conventions ratified by the Peopleís Republic of China? What action does the Council intend to take to ensure that, pending total abolition of this form of arbitrary imprisonment, the Chinese authorities guarantee freedom of access for international organisations to the custody and repatriation centres? More generally, what measures will the Council take to ensure rigorous and verifiable compliance by China with the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights? Reply (17 December 1999) 1. The EU has expressed its concern about Human Rights violations in China on several occasions, in multilateral fora as well as in bilateral contacts with the Chinese authorities, and in particular in the framework of the EU-China Human Rights dialogue. Through this dialogue, the EU regularly raises among other issues the questions of administrative detention and arbitrary arrests. The EU strongly urged the the Chinese authorities to change their policy in this area and to comply with the provisions of UN Covenants on political and civil rights and social, economic and cultural rights it has signed over the last two years. It also underlined the importance of giving follow-up to the recommendations made by the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention following its visit to China. The EU further encouraged China to pursue cooperation with the ICRC regarding access to detention centres. Finally, the EU proposed to China that technical assistance projects be developed to help the Chinese government to ratify and implement the UN Covenants mentioned above. 2. The last round of the EU-China Human Rights dialogue was held on 19 October in Beijing. On this occasion, the Chinese authorities briefed the EU on envisaged reforms in administrative detention. They