WRITTEN QUESTION E-2169/99 by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Kerosene tax in civil aviation.
8. 8. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 225 E/63 Are there any provisions requiring Member State authorities that administer EU-funded projects 1. publicly to acknowledge the source of such funding? If so, will the Commission reprimand the Bavarian land government on this occasion? If not, why not, and are any provisions to that effect in the pipeline? To my present knowledge, the objective associated with the establishment of these centres of creating 2. 600 new jobs in rural areas has fallen well short of its target. Has the Commission monitored this project for effective use of public funds, in relation in particular to job-creation? If so, with what results? If not, why not, and does it intend to do so? Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (21 December 1999) Operational programmes in the framework of objective 5b and Leader II and co-financed by the structural funds are designed on the level of priorities and measures, not at project level. Therefore the Commission usually has no knowledge of individual projects. In the case of átop elfí (English: top eleven) the Bavarian authorities informed the Bavarian objective 5b and Leader II monitoring committee that the Bavarian concept for the integrated use of telecommunication in rural areas (átop elfí) fits into the measures of the operational programmes. It consists of a bundle of different projects which, for better visibility, were summarised in the concept átop elfí. These projects were connected with the European agriculture guidance and guarantee fund (EAGGF) and European social fund (ESF) measures of the objective 5b operational programme e. g. measure 7 áforestryí and átop elfí project áforestry information systemí. Neither Commission nor monitoring committee were informed of the detailed amounts of money intended to be spent under átop elfí. The Commission has contacted the German authorities in order to verify the figures the Honourable Member mentioned in his question. The Commission was not informed about the brochure, which was prepared by the Bavarian authorities on átop elfí. Point E of the áhorizontal clausesí, annexed to the Commission decisions on the operational 1. lays down that Commission Decision No 94/342/EC of 31 May 1994 (1) concerning programmes, information and publicity measures to be carried out by the Member States concerning assistance from the structural funds shall apply. The Commission is not in a position to confirm the Bavarian government did fulfil the requirements of the above mentioned publication in respect to the projects in question. The Commission is contacting the Member State in this connection. 2. As the operational programme is designed on measure level the Commission cannot carry out feasibility studies for projects. This is up to the Member State. In order to be able to deliver more detailed information the Commission is contacting the Member State. (1) OJ L 152, 18. 6. 1994. (2000/C 225 E/063) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2169/99 by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Commission (29 November 1999) Subject: Kerosene tax in civil aviation The 1944 Chicago Convention stipulates that kerosene used as fuel in international civil aviation may not be subject to taxation. At the same time, flights within the EU, but between different EU Member States, continue to be treated as áinternational flightsí, and thus to be covered by that exemption. The assumption C 225 E/64 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 8. 8. 2000 is undoubtedly justified that the above convention is out of date and in need of fundamental review. A resolution (B5-0118/1999) was, moreover, recently adopted by the European Parliament calling in particular on the Commission to draw up a white paper on measures relating to civil aviation, which would include measures paving the way for taxes on kerosene fuel to be introduced. The Commission consequently is asked: whether, pending completion of the said white paper, it will declare flights within the EU to be internal flights and on that basis immediately impose a tax on kerosene for use in civil aviation, the proceeds being used to fund environmental projects? Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission (21 January 2000) The Commission recalls its position on taxation of kerosene used in international aviation as presented in the report (1) recommending that excise duties on mineral oil should be extended to aviation kerosene as legal situation allows the Community to levy such a tax on all air carriers soon as the international including those from third countries. This position has not changed. Following the debates in Council, the Commission commissioned a study on the analysis of the taxation of aviation fuel. This work has been completed and the Commission has presented its conclusions recently in the communication on air transport and environment to the Parliament and the other institutions (2). The Commission does not, at this stage, intra-Community flights as domestic (national) flights in the sense of the Chicago Convention. It will in co-ordination with ongoing preparatory work at the level of the International civil aviation organisation (ICAO), continue its work on a range of market-based options including taxation aimed at reducing the environmental impact of air transport with a view to launch an initiative in 2001. intend to declare all (1) COM(96) 549 final. (2) COM(1999) 640 final. (2000/C 225 E/064) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2172/99 by Salvador JovØ Peres (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (29 November 1999) Subject: Investment aid for flax processing The Order of 5 April 1999 concerning a call for projects under Law 50/1985 on regional incentive measures, published in the Boletín Oficial del Estado Espaæol (Official Bulletin of the Spanish State) of 25 May 1999 (p. 197), grants a subsidy of Ptas 20 160 470 to the firm Colisur 2000 Ltd. , Picón, Ciudad Real. Under paragraph 2(12) of the annex to Commission Decision 94/173/EC (1) of 22 March 1994 on the selection criteria to be adopted for investments improving the processing and marketing conditions for agricultural and forestry products, All investments in the flax and hemp sector are excluded except where they concern products for new non-food uses or modernisation without increase in total capacity in the region concerned. í In the Commissionís opinion, is the subsidy granted to Colisur 2000 compatible with the terms of this Commission decision and with other legislation in force? (1) OJ L 79, 23. 3. 1994, p. 29