WRITTEN QUESTION P-0022/00 by Bertel Haarder (ELDR) to the Commission. European register of fingerprints of asylum-seekers (Eurodac).
24. 10. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 303 E/125 of group of experts is after a survey, to identify in detail the damage and destruction of cultural property, mainly architectural or archaeological heritage (monuments and/or sites) of all ethnic and religious groups throughout Kosovo; to establish a list of priorities for intervention based on the survey; and to assist in setting-up teams of experts from local, regional or federal levels, representing all ethnic and religious groups of the region, who should draw up feasibility studies or intervention plans for the priorities established in by the survey. As to the remainder of Yugoslavia the Commission would like to refer the Honourable Member to its reply to his previous written question E-1587/99 (2). (1) OJ L 299, 20. 11. 1999. (2) OJ C 170, 20. 6. 2000, p. 41. (2000/C 303 E/126) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0022/00 by Bertel Haarder (ELDR) to the Commission (13 January 2000) Subject: European register of fingerprints of asylum-seekers (Eurodac) In view of the Danish reservation on judicial cooperation (Edinburgh agreement), will the Commission state whether or not Denmark may participate in Eurodac, the common fingerprint register? What conditions does Denmark have to meet if it is to participate in Eurodac on an equal footing with the other countries taking part? Can the Commission confirm that Denmark may participate in Eurodac only if it fully accepts the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice? Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission (29 February 2000) The Commissionís proposal for a Eurodac regulation (1) has its legal basis in Title IV of the EC Treaty. The Treaty of Amsterdam contains a Protocol on the position of Denmark which governs Denmarkís position in relation to measures proposed pursuant to Title IV (2). Article 1 of the Protocol provides that Denmark shall not take part in the adoption of measures proposed under Title IV. Article 2 provides that no measure adopted under Title IV shall be binding on or applicable in Denmark. Under the provisions of the Treaty as they apply at present, Denmark will therefore not take part in the adoption of the Eurodac regulation and will not be bound by its provisions. Article 5 of the Protocol is concerned with Denmarkís position in relation to proposals or initiatives to build upon the Schengen acquis under the provisions of Title IV of the Treaty. It allows Denmark to decide to implement in its national law a Council decision to build on the Schengen acquis, and in so doing to law between Denmark and the Schengen States (3) and, where create an obligation in international applicable, the United Kingdom and Ireland. The draft Eurodac regulation can not, however, be regarded as an initiative to build on the Schengen acquis, and Article 5 is therefore not applicable. Article 7 of the Protocol allows Denmark, in accordance with its constitutional requirements, to inform the other Member States that it no longer wishes to avail itself of all or part of the protocol, in which case it would then apply in full all relevant measures then in force. Denmark has not so far announced that it intends to use this procedure. The use of the Article 7 mechanism would however allow Denmark to participate in Eurodac on an identical footing with the other Member States. The Council has drawn up a draft declaration to the Eurodac regulation to the effect that it would be interested in the conclusion of an agreement between the Community and Denmark, allowing the latter to C 303 E/126 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 24. 10. 2000 be associated with the operation of the Eurodac system, whilst respecting the Protocol on the position of Denmark. The Commission is considering whether a mechanism for Danish participation based on an agreement between the Community and Denmark would be fully consistent with the provisions of the Treaties, including the Protocol on the position of Denmark. This requires intensive legal scrutiny and is certainly an unprecedented situation. Any approach which placed Denmark in a position not equivalent to that of the other Member States, for instance in relation to the jurisdiction of the Court of justice, would however be unacceptable. The Commission is continuing to reflect on this matter. (1) Proposal for a Council Regulation concerning the establishment of Eurodací for the comparison of the fingerprints of applicants for asylum and certain other aliens, COM(1999) 260 final, Brussels, 26. 05. 1999. (2) Protocol on the position on Denmark annexed to the Treaty establishing the European Community and the Treaty on European Union. (3) The states referred to in Article 1 of the Protocol integrating the Schengen acquis into the framework of the European Union. (2000/C 303 E/127) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0024/00 by BØatrice Patrie (PSE) to the Commission (13 January 2000) Subject: Aid to French departments hit by storms Two violent storms hit France between 25 and 27 December 1999, killing more than 80 people and depriving thousands of households of electricity, heating, running water and telephone lines for several days. Stock is now being taken of the situation in the most seriously affected departments (Charente-Maritime, Charente, Haute-Vienne, Creuse, Gironde, Dordogne, CorrŁze, Landes and Seine-et-Marne), and the damage is estimated at over FF 40 bn. It will take weeks for normal services to be fully restored. Although a large proportion of the worst-hit departments will still need to pay out huge sums to help with the reconstruction of devastated areas and repair the extensive damage to buildings and infrastructure. the costs will be covered by insurance companies, Is the European Union prepared, on an exceptional basis, to establish an emergency fund to provide the affected French departments with financial aid? Will the Commission give priority to the worst-hit departments and areas when it next determines which parts of France should be eligible for Structural Fund aid? In a longer-term perspective, does the Commission intend to reintroduce the budget line for áaid in the event of natural disastersí, which was removed a few years ago? Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission (10 February 2000) The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the answer given to her oral question H-8/00 during Question Time in the January 2000 part-session, and to Parliamentís debate on the storms in Europe and the Resolution adopted on 20 January 2000 (1). Moreover, under the new Structural Funds Regulation (2), the Commission and the Member State are jointly responsible for defining which areas are eligible under Objective 2. Each Member State must propose to the Commission a list of areas it considers to be priorities. Acting on the proposal submitted by the French authorities, the Commission therefore took a decision of principle on the list of areas eligible under Objective 2 on 18 January 2000. (1) Debates of the European Parliament (January 2000). (2) OJ L 161, 26. 6. 1999