WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2488/98 by Undine-Uta BLOCH von BLOTTNITZ , Edith MÜLLER to the Commission. EU aid and improved nuclear safety in Central and Eastern Europe
14. 5. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 135/63 Previous studies show that there are good opportunities for the development of combined transport 2. and short sea shipping on the corridor. It is therefore expected that this important corridor will be able to contribute substantially to improving the access of peripheral regions of the Community and of Mediterranean countries to the central regions of the Community in a framework of sustainable mobility of persons and goods. The Commission is therefore convinced of its usefulness. 3. The Adriatic and Ionian seas were also recognised as an important transport element by the Third pan-European transport conference held in Helsinki in June 1997, where the Adriatic/Ionian PETrA (Pan- European transport area) was defined. It is intended that, for the PETrA, the countries concerned should work on the establishment of an infrastructure development plan for the area and for its links with the pan- European corridors and the Trans-European transport network. With the encouragement of the Com- mission, Italy and Greece have jointly undertaken some preparatory work and plan to call a general meeting of all interested parties, including the Commission, in the near future. (1) OJ L 228, 23. 9. 1995. (1999/C 135/073) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2488/98 by Undine-Uta Bloch von Blottnitz (V) and Edith Müller (V) to the Commission Subject: EU aid and improved nuclear safety in Central and Eastern Europe (30 July 1998) The European Union is spending substantial sums under the PHARE and TACIS programmes on improving nuclear safety in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. Can the Commission estimate (in percentage and/or real terms) the extent to which nuclear safety has improved in the recipient countries, following the deployment of the various types of EU aid, since the programmes were initiated? (1999/C 135/074) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2489/98 by Undine-Uta Bloch von Blottnitz (V) and Edith Müller (V) to the Commission Subject: EU aid and improved nuclear safety in Central and Eastern Europe (30 July 1998) As long ago as November 1996, in the study ‘Nuclear safeguards and nuclear safety in the East’ (PE 166. 083/fin. ), the European Parliament’s STOA unit documented serious shortcomings in the administration of EU financial aid to the countries of Central and Eastern Europe in connection with the PHARE and TACIS programmes. At around the same time the Commission commissioned a similar study, the purpose of which was to evaluate the safety improvements which had actually been achieved in the nuclear sector in the recipient countries. However, the European Parliament has not been given access to date either to that study or to its results. Experiences with current PHARE and TACIS projects suggest that little or nothing has changed with regard to the weaknesses in the EU-funded aid programmes previously identified in the STOA study. 1. Does the Commission consider that the procedural rules governing the aid programmes make it possible to react quickly enough to sudden problems, or are there possibilities for improvement in this respect and, if so, what are they? 2. Is it correct that the Commission is having serious problems in coordinating aid to the Central and Eastern European nuclear sector, as intended by the G24 States, partly because of a lack of adequate communication not only between its own departments but also with other organisations involved, and does it consider the staff available to it in this area to be adequate in terms of numbers and qualifications? 3. What is the Commission’s view of the effects of the problem of liability on improvements in nuclear security in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, and what effect are liability issues having on the success of the EU funds deployed to this end?