WRITTEN QUESTION E-1585/99 by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission. Mackerel Box.
C 219 E/10 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 1. 8. 2000 (2000/C 219 E/013) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1565/99 by Lucio Manisco (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (1 September 1999) Subject: Audits of Community RTD projects For years the Court of Auditors has been asking for a substantial increase in the number of audits in the RTD field. Why has the Commission not complied with the Courtís repeated exhortations? Answer given by Mr Busquin on behalf of the Commission (15 October 1999) In the past three years, the Commission has continuously increased the number of checks on the spot as well as the number of audited research and technological development (RTD) contracts, as shown in the table below. Number of audits completed Cumulative % increase 1996 Number of audited contracts Cumulative % increase 1996 1996 42 100 % 55 100 % 1997 59 140 % 117 213 % 1998 69 164 % 132 240 % Audit plans have been based on a selection procedure making use of a new risk analysis method, taking into account audits on request. Furthermore, this increase in the number of audits will be enhanced by the implementation of a new framework agreement signed with an external audit firm. These measures will increase the audit capacity so as to cover 10 % of contractors in the framework of the 5th framework programme. (2000/C 219 E/014) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1585/99 by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission (1 September 1999) Subject: Mackerel Box In view of the fact that 30 000 tonnes of mackerel are caught in or around the South West Mackerel Box, does not the Commission feel it would be best for economic and vessel safety to allow this fish to be caught closer to the shore, with adequate safety being provided for the handliners who can be given their own area? Bearing in mind that 50 000 tonnes of juveniles per annum are caught off the West Coast of Ireland and that substantial tonnages are also caught by Scottish, Norwegian and Danish vessels, would the Commission consider providing a limited fishery closer to the shore in an amended Mackerel Box with no increase in tonnage, i. e. 30 000 tonnes? 1. 8. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 219 E/11 Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (4 October 1999) The Council established the so-called mackerel box in 1983 as a measure to protect large concentrations of juvenile mackerel that occur in this area. In 1992, the Commissionís scientific and technical committee for fisheries evaluated the mackerel box and advised that the box should be maintained as it currently stands, although it was established that juvenile mackerel are now found over a wide area throughout western Community waters (1). It would appear therefore that the continuation of the present mackerel box would be the preferred way to protect juvenile mackerel. In the revised technical measures regulation, Council Regulation (EC) No 850/98 of 30 March 1998 for the conservation of fishery resources through technical measures for the protection of juveniles of marine organisms (2), that will become applicable as of 1 January 2000, the current mackerel box will be maintained essentially unaltered. In a nutshell, the provisions for the mackerel box stipulate that there shall be no directed fishery for mackerel in the area, with the exception of vessels fishing exclusively with gill nets or hand lines. Subject to these stipulations and to further technical provisions as regards fishing for mackerel, mackerel can be fished within the quantities of the national quotas established on a yearly basis for the stock of western mackerel. It remains an established fact that a very large proportion of all the mackerel found around Cornwall, including in the mackerel box, is juvenile. Setting a definite quota of around 30 000 tonnes in this area would most likely imply an increase in the catch of juvenile mackerel, which is certainly not desirable from the point of view of conservation of fish stocks. (1) SEC(92) 2347. (2) OJ L 125, 27. 4. 1998. (2000/C 219 E/015) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1592/99 by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission (1 September 1999) Subject: Discrimination against footballers In view of the fact that the Bosman Ruling should have covered EC nationals, EEA nationals and certain countries with which the EC had association agreements including Turkey, Tunisia, Morocco, Algeria, Poland, Hungary, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Romania, Bulgaria and the Baltic States, can the Com- mission confirm that it would be illegal for football or national authorities to discriminate against nationals of states with association agreements that were already playing football within the EU? Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission (12 October 1999) The Community association or cooperation agreements with Turkey, Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco and the Europe agreements with Poland, Hungary, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Romania, Bulgaria and the Baltic states contain a provision on equal treatment of workers as regards working conditions and remuneration. On this basis, the Commission considers that workers who are nationals of these countries should be treated on the same basis as Community nationals when they are legally employed in the Member States