WRITTEN QUESTION E-2123/99 by Gianfranco Dell'Alba (TDI) to the Commission. Objective 2 for the 2000-2006 period and the reasons for the rejection of Italy's proposals.
8. 8. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 225 E/53 (2000/C 225 E/052) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2105/99 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (22 November 1999) Subject: New methods for finding persons trapped inside the wreckage of buildings The recent earthquakes in Turkey, Greece and other countries around the world have drawn attention to the extremely serious issue of persons trapped inside the wreckage of buildings and the need for effective search and rescue methods. Up to now rescue teams have been using accounts and information given by survivors, sound detection (acoustic method) and micro-cameras (visual method), as well as trained dogs. According to experts, other methods of finding trapped persons could be developed and used, based on the detection of chemicals emitted by the human body in various situations, and especially in difficult circumstances such as being trapped in buildings which have collapsed. It appears that methods like these have been tested for military purposes. Would the Commission be willing to aid the development and use of similar methods for use by rescue teams dealing with earthquakes and trapped victims? Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission (24 January 2000) The Commission has in the past financed at least one pilot project to build an appliance which uses microwave radar to detect persons trapped in rubble. The Honourable Member is referred to the Commissionís Internet site at the following address: http://www. europa. eu. int/comm/environment/civil/ prote/cpactiv/cpact08e. htm, where further information on the project is available. Under the Community action programme in the field of civil protection, it falls to the national authorities to determine the content and scope of any pilot projects in this area with a view to incorporating the results into rescue team practice. On this basis, the Commission will be prepared to examine the funding of a project proposed in this area. Research and development related to novel technical solutions may be granted financial Community support within the fifth framework programme for RTD (1), provided that the rules of participation as well as the contents of the workplans of the thematic programmes are respected. (1) OJ L 26, 1. 2. 1999. (2000/C 225 E/053) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2123/99 by Gianfranco DellíAlba (TDI) to the Commission (24 November 1999) Subject: Objective 2 for the 2000-2006 period and the reasons for the rejection of Italyís proposals The Commission has declared the Italian governmentís proposals concerning the areas eligible for Objective 2 for the 2000-2006 period áinadmissibleí, has refused to examine their contents, and has asked the government to rewrite them all. This refusal is likely to delay considerably the allocation of funds to the regions and the subsequent implementation of structural policies, and also to jeopardise, perhaps to the benefit of other countries, the fundsí commitment and expenditure capacities. C 225 E/54 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 8. 8. 2000 When the framework regulation on the Structural Funds was adopted, the Commission was supposed to have committed itself to taking into account the particular circumstances of individual Member States when making an overall examination of the eligible zones. Can the Commission answer the following questions: 1. What are the reasons that have led to this drastic decision, for which there is not even any provision in the above-mentioned regulation? 2. Does the Commission not consider that it has failed to take sufficient account of possible opportu- nities for derogation connected with Italyís particular circumstances? Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission (21 January 2000) The proposed list of areas eligible for Objective 2 sent to the Commission by the Italian authorities 1. on 1 October 1999 was considered not to be acceptable because it did not comply with Article 4(4) of Council Regulation No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds (1). This paragraph stipulates that in each Member State the areas meeting the Communityí criteria laid down in Article 4(5) and (6) must contain at least 50 % of the population eligible for Objective 2 assistance. However, the areas put forward by the Italian authorities in compliance with these criteria contained only 2,2 million people (i. e. only 29,6 % of the total eligible population). 2. The Commission considers that the Regulation, which was adopted by all the Member States and received the assent of the European Parliament, provides considerable scope for accommodating the specific circumstances of Italy and that it is not necessary to resort to derogations from the regulatory framework. For example, the Italian authorities are not obliged to submit a proposal for all of the areas meeting the Community criteria (the population of which is 5 021 900). All they are required to submit is a list of areas satisfying these criteria in which the total population is at least 3 701 000. They are also permitted to calculate 50 % of the eligible population according to ánationalí criteria laid down in Article 4(7) to (9) of the Regulation. (1) OJ L 161, 26. 6. 1999. (2000/C 225 E/054) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2124/99 by Antonio Tajani (PPE-DE) to the Commission (24 November 1999) Subject: The United Kingdom and the transposition of the Community directives relating to insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles In the United Kingdom at present, the Road Traffic Act 1991 prescribes a sentence of between five and ten yearsí imprisonment in cases concerning careless and/or reckless driving causing death, while the level of civil compensation laid down is insignificant and offensive to the feelings of the family, equating as it does a human life with the cost of a small car. The European Union has already legislated on this matter to bring about the approximation of the Member Statesí laws (Directive 72/166/EEC (1) of 24 April 1972 and Directive 84/5/EEC (2)) and Directive 90/232/ EEC (3) of 14 May 1990 specifically states that ámotor vehicle accident victims should be guaranteed comparable treatment irrespective of where in the Community accidents occurí. The deadline for transposition of this directive was 31 December 1992 and any extensions are exclusively limited to the Member States whose economies show differences in developmentí and, therefore, do not apply to the United Kingdom