You are on page 1of 2

C 304/86 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 2. 10.


4. The contracting firms are responsible for payment and cover of occupational entitlements and social
security contributions of the staff supplied to the Commission. The Commission, the agencies and the staff are
required to comply with national legislation and, in particular, the Law of 24 July 1987 on temporary work and
the supply of staff to clients (published on 20 August 1987 in the Moniteur Belge) and the Law of 19 May 1994
laying down the rules governing temporary work and the temporary loaning of staff (published on 31 May 1994
in the Mémorial du Luxembourg). These two Member States have some of the most comprehensive regulations
on the matter in Europe.

(98/C 304/129) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0359/98
by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission
(24 February 1998)

Subject: Extension of deadline for tabling proposals regarding the programme for the return of refugees to

At the workshop held in Brussels on 23 January 1998 concerning the 1998 programme for the return of refugees
Bosnia Herzigovina, the Commission asked Member States to submit proposals by 19 February 1998.

Since the proposal will include measures for the rebuilding or repaid or homes, local water and power supply
networks, etc. together with the relevant social and financial measures would the Commission consider
extending this deadline since a considerable amount of preparation and research will be necessary if sound
proposal are to be made in this connection.

Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission
(18 March 1998)

The Commission is not investigating the possibility of an extension of the deadline for submission of projects for
its assistance programme in favour of the return of refugees and displaced persons to Bosnia and Herzegovina.

The information document of 600 pages forwarded to the participants of the workshop on the above mentioned
programme (held on 23 January 1998 in Brussels) contained material for the preparation of projects as well as
sample projects. More guidance was given in follow-up seminars. For those who already have experience in
reconstruction and return programmes the deadline should not pose a problem.

Given the need to start reconstruction by the beginning of the construction period in early April 1998, the
Commission cannot allow a longer preparation time. The remaining weeks until April are needed for the
selection of the most appropriate projects and the conclusion of the contracts as well as the unavoidable
administrative procedures to obtain the approval of Member States (and the Commission) to the programme.

Nevertheless, additional funds for the follow-up to possible political breakthroughs are set aside as requested by
the office of the United Nations high representative.

(98/C 304/130) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0363/98
by Marı́a Sornosa Martı́nez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission
(24 February 1998)

Subject: The Aguamarga salt-marshes in Alicante

In a written question to the Commission of 3 December 1997, I raised the issue of the major threat to the
Aguamarga wetlands in Alicante posed by urban growth, from which these marshes have always suffered.

The Kelme group are currently drawing up plans for building a sports centre, an artificial lake and 500 houses in
the Aguamarga marshlands.
2. 10. 98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 304/87

The area is included on Valencian Community’s Inventory of Wetlands, and in order for the plan to be approved,
the General Building Plan would have to be amended and at least a quarter of the sites would have to be
reclassified as low-density building land.

Ecological groups and the opposition parties are totally opposed to this project’s going ahead, but the party in
government is inclined to support it, and the scheme may become a reality.

Given that these salt-marshes are a natural area of major cultural, scientific and recreational value,
1. Can the Commission intervene in order to preserve them in their current state?
2. Can the Commission reconsider the questions I raised in my previous written question on this subject?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission
(13 March 1998)

This site has not been designated as a special protection area (SPA) for birds under Directive 79/409/EEC on the
conservation of wild birds (1), nor has it been scientifically classified as an important area for bird conservation.

This site has not been proposed by Spain for inclusion in the Natura 2000 network, pursuant to Directive
92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (2). Nor is the Commission aware
that it contains a priority species or type of natural habitat which, on the basis of relevant and reliable scientific
information, would make it essential to the maintenance of this type of priority habitat or to the survival of this
priority species. This site thus appears to be of greater natural interest to Spain than to the Community.
Consequently, the Commission has no particular reason to intervene in place of the Spanish authorities.

The Commission’s position has not changed since it answered the Honourable Member’s written question No
E-4039/97 (3). In January 1998, Spain sent the Commission the list of sites proposed for inclusion in the Natura
2000 network for the Mediterranean biogeographical region. The Aguamarga wetland is not included in that list.

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.
(2) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.
(3) OJ C 196, 22.6.1998, p. 66.

(98/C 304/131) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0366/98
by Stefano De Luca (ELDR) to the Commission
(24 February 1998)

Subject: Community aid for the restoration of the Petruzzelli Theatre

On 27 October 1991, the Petruzzelli Theatre in Bari, which was built between 1898 and 1903 and is the only
privately owned theatre in Europe, was severely damaged by a terrible fire.

In 1996 another famous Italian theatre, ‘La Fenice’ in Venice, was completely destroyed.

However, while extensive Community assistance was provided for the rebuilding of ‘La Fenice’, the Petruzzelli
has received only ECU 80 000 for the partial restoration of its foyer.

1. Does the Commission consider that this curious discrepancy is a result of the fact that, unlike other
European theatres, the Petruzzelli Theatre is privately owned?

2. Does the Commission not consider that, in view of the historical and artistic value of the Petruzzelli Theatre
in Bari, Community funds should be provided to enable the restoration work to be completed, since the theatre’s
owners, the Messeni Nemegna family, do not have the finance needed themselves?