WRITTEN QUESTION E-1096/00 by Joaquim Miranda (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Environmental impact of the construction of a quay in the autonomous region of Madeira.
C 81 E/18 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 13. 3. 2001 building up its canned tuna market, would lose out as well. In the light of these findings, and bearing in mind the aforementioned long-standing criticism by producer Member States and Parliament of the said tariff suspension arrangements as unnecessary, and of their application as highly damaging, Can the Commission answer the following: ü what was the real aim underlying the Commissionís eagerness to introduce the tariff suspension? ü what was the Commissionís assessment of its damaging impact, in the light of the criticism thereof made by the sector, Parliament and producer Member States? ü is the Commission aware that it could be accused of unlawfully colluding with a given undertaking to help the latter, to the detriment of the remainder of Community industry, the ACP countries and those states included in the GSP? ü how can citizens trust the Commission when decisions are taken in an irresponsible fashion? Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (5 June 2000) The Commission regrets the inaccuracies contained in the Honourable Memberís written question and must stress that it did not make public the study to which the Honourable Member refers. The Commission sent the study only to the Council and to Parliamentís fisheries committee. The document indeed includes numerous data on private companies in Spain, France and Italy (e. g. market share, turnover and shareholding), the publication of which could be detrimental to the firmsí competitiveness (see the Council and the Commissionís joint code of conduct on public access to documents, implemented by Commission Decision 94/90/ECSC, EC, Euratom of 8 February 1994 (1), as amended by Decision 96/ 567/EC, ECSC, Euratom (2)). It is also incorrect to say that the study was requested in response to the Commission proposal to include, in the new Regulation on the common organisation of the markets in fishery and aquaculture products, a tariff suspension for tuna loins. The study in fact stems from an undertaking which the Commission gave at the Councilís request when it adopted Council Regulation (EC) No 745/1999 of 30 March 1999 opening and providing for the administration of autonomous Community tariff quotas for certain fishery products (3) for 1999, which set ü for the third year running ü a tariff quota for tuna loins. The Commission would point out that, with its agreement, the Council did not opt for a tariff suspension when adopting the new common organisation of the markets in fishery and aquaculture products. Instead a compromise solution (a multi-annual tariff quota of 4 000 tonnes) ü supported by all the tuna- producing Member States ü was found, which protects the interests of all the parties involved. (1) OJ L 46, 18. 2. 1994. (2) OJ L 247, 28. 9. 1996. (3) OJ L 96, 10. 4. 1999. (2001/C 81 E/019) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1096/00 by Joaquim Miranda (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (7 April 2000) Subject: Environmental impact of the construction of a quay in the autonomous region of Madeira A quay is currently under construction in the valley of Porto Novo (municipality of Santa Cruz, Autonomous Region of Madeira), for which Community funding is being provided under the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF). 13. 3. 2001 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 81 E/19 The environment has already suffered serious damage owing to the dumping of soil along the coastline in preparation for construction of the quay, while the valley in question already harbours a number of sources of pollution affecting streams, seawater, the countryside and air quality. Can the Commission say: ü What environmental impact studies were carried out before soil was dumped in the sea? ü What studies have been carried out prior to construction of the future quay at Porto Novo? ü What criteria does the European Union follow in awarding funding for this type of project? Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission (14 June 2000) Under the Operational Programme for the Autonomous Region of Madeira (1) the sum of ESC 375 million (€ 1,87 million) was assigned for construction of a quay at the port of Porto Novo. This decision of the managing authority for the programme was in line with its terms of reference and in the relevant Community Regulations: Council Regulation (EEC) conformity with the provisions of No 2052/88 of 24 June 1988 on the tasks of the Structural Funds and their effectiveness and on coordination of their activities between themselves and with the operations of the European Investment instruments (2), Council Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88 Bank and the other of 19 December 1988 laying down provisions for implementing Regulation (EEC) No 2052/88 as regards coordination of the activities of the different Structural Funds between themselves and with the operations of the European Investment Bank and the other existing financial instruments (3), and Council Regulation (EEC) No 4254/88 of 19 December 1988 laying down provisions for implementing Regulation (EEC) No 2052/88 as regards the European Regional Development Fund (3) (respectively amended by Council Regulations (EEC) Nos 2081/93, 2082/93 and 2083/93 of 20 July 1993 (4)). existing financial The quay, which has a total length of 162 metres, is now complete. It has been constructed in order to take over a large proportion of the commercial activities of the port of Funchal, so freeing the latter for activities more attuned to its normal role as a tourist port. The criteria set by the Community for the financing of projects of this type are indicated in the Operational Programme itself. They provide for the financing of port infrastructure in order to increase the number of ports and so guarantee good working conditions at Funchal. The Porto Novo sea terminal is specifically mentioned in the programme. In the case of projects costing less than € 25 million in total that are selected for Community part- financing it falls to the implementing national authorities to verify that all administrative and legal requirements are met, including compliance with the environmental rules in force. (1) Commission Decision 464/final 2 of 4 March 1994. (2) OJ L 185, 15. 7. 1988. (3) OJ L 374, 31. 12. 1988. (4) OJ L 193, 31. 7. 1993