You are on page 1of 2

11. 3.

98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 76/79

Will this evaluation be submitted by 30 June 1997 as requested, so that Parliament can take a decision regarding
future budgetary funding for the programmes concerned?

If so, could I be sent a copy of the evaluation in my capacity as 1998 budget rapporteur for the Committee on
Development and Cooperation?

(1) OJ C 308, 20.11.1995, p. 120.

Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission


(17 July 1997)

The Parliament, in its resolution A4-0235/95 of 26 October 1995, requested the Commission to provide by
30 June 1997 an interim evaluation of the Tacis, the Phare and Meda programmes.

The deadline of 30 June 1997 has been met for all three reports. It is hoped that the findings of these evaluations
will give insight into the achievements of the programmes.

The evaluations transmitted to the Parliament are a first step in a dialogue between the Commission and the
Parliament on evaluations-related topics. Further evaluations are in the course of preparation, and will be
communicated in due course.

(98/C 76/167) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2212/97


by Angela Sierra González (GUE/NGL) to the Commission
(30 June 1997)

Subject: Risk of extinction − monk seals in Cabo Blanco (Mauritania)

In May 1997 at least 150 monk seals died off the coast of the Cabo Blanco peninsula in Mauritania, a location
which is at present home to the world’s largest community of these mammals.

This species, ‘Munachus munachus’, is protected under Annex II of the ‘habitat’ directive, as one of the species
whose conservation is marked as a priority.

What measures has the Commission taken, or what measures does it intend to take, to stop the decline in the
monk seal population?

Does the Commission know the causes of this exceedingly large number of deaths off the African coast?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission


(4 September 1997)

The Life-Nature project ‘Actions for the conservation of the monk seal in the Atlantic’ aimed to carry out a
reintroduction of this species in the Canary Islands, in order to reduce the risks arising from the population of
300 individuals being concentrated along a coastline of less than 2 kilometres, and to create a genetic link with
the small population that still exists in Madeira.

In view of the situation arising from the death of two thirds of this population, the Commission has granted the
existing Life-Nature project special permission to reorientate a part of its budget. This budget will be allocated to
care to be given to orphans, reinforcement of the scientific team working at the colony, scientific meetings, and
other actions, if needed, to save the remaining animals.
C 76/80 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 11. 3. 98

The team in charge of the project has prepared, in consultation with the authorities, an action plan to be
implemented if the mortality again begins to affect the colony. The causes of this mortality are not yet completely
known. The cause could be a toxin caused by a planktonic algae group, or a virus. Further analyses continue to
determine the real causes of this mortality.

(98/C 76/168) WRITTEN QUESTION P-2224/97


by Sören Wibe (PSE) to the Commission
(19 June 1997)

Subject: Regional aid as a reason for the relocation of business activity

Have the SCJ System and Solectron plants in Scotland been developed with the help of regional aid from the
European Union? Swedish newspapers claim that they have, and that Ericsson is now cutting its workforce in
Norrköping and shifting production to those plants.

Have the aforementioned companies in Scotland recently received regional aid from the EU? If so, in what form
and how much? Is it reasonable to assume that such aid was the reason for the relocation of business activities? If
so, is this not a case of unfair competition?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission


(16 July 1997)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question P-1679/97 by
Mrs Eriksson (1).

(1) OJ C 391, 23.12.1997, p. 119.

(98/C 76/169) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2228/97


by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission
(2 July 1997)

Subject: Cofinancing of refugee reception centres in Greece

The Greek Government has adopted a law committing itself to set up reception and temporary-stay centres for
refugees who enter Greece by a variety of means.

Is the setting up of such centres eligible for European Union cofinancing? From which programmes?

Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission


(4 September 1997)

The Honourable Member is certainly aware that the Parliament has created a new budget line in 1997 containing
3.75 MECU in the reserve, which is mainly intended to cover pilot projects on the reception of asylum seekers
and displaced people.

Since this is a new budget line, and there has not previously been any concrete action by the Community in this
field, the Commission intends to proceed by means of pilot projects. Following the Article K.8 agreement and the
release by the Parliament of 2.25 MECU from the reserve, the way is open for Member States, international
organisations and non-governmental organisations to submit pilot projects in the field of the reception of asylum
seekers and displaced people. The Commission has invited Member States to submit concrete projects in these
areas.