You are on page 1of 2


2003 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 110 E/105

detrimental to the international advocacy efforts and it is also a major obstacle to improving humanitarian
response. The project will be led by the United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund (Unicef).

These efforts form an integral part of the promotion and protection of human rights within humanitarian
operations as well as in linking relief, rehabilitation and development.

Under the European Initiative for Democracy and Human Rights (Chapter B7-7) for 2000, support has
included funding for a project undertaken by Unicef in Sierra Leone regarding the protection and
reintegration of children associated with the fighting forces and other children separated from their
families as a result of the conflict. In addition, under the European Initiative for Democracy and Human
Rights (EIDHR) budget for 2001 a project aimed at the social re-integration of young ex-combatants is
being implemented by AFMAL (1) and Caritas Makemi. A project in favour of children victims of war,
implemented in Ethiopia and Angola by Alisei (2), ended recently.

As regards awareness-raising the EIDHR is funding the Earth Action project: ‘The Convention on the
Rights of the Child. Building global support for implementation’. The overall project objective is to educate
and raise awareness of civil society and to promote the rights of the child, including those of child soldiers
and homeless children, by informing citizen groups, member of parliaments, other influential individuals,
journalists and young people. Children’s Rights will be mainstreamed in all the actions implemented by the
EIDHR over the period 2002-2004, including action for conflict prevention and dealing with its

(1) Associazione con i Fatebenefratelli per i Malati Lontani.

(2) Associazione per la cooperazione internazionale e l’aiuto umanitario.

(2003/C 110 E/107) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2795/02

by Jan Dhaene (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(4 October 2002)

Subject: European Mobility Week and the International Car Free Day

On 22 September 2002, International Car Free Day was held in 1300 European towns and municipalities.
This one-day campaign formed part of European Mobility Week. The project has not yet been evaluated,
but it is clear from the media and from the reactions of various people involved that this initiative was a
great success. The whole of the Brussels Region, for example, was made car-free. This was widely
applauded and met with little opposition.

Can the Commission answer the following:

 What will the Commission do with the evaluation which is being made of this European campaign

 How much do European Mobility Week and the International Car Free Day cost the Commission?

 Will the Commission increase this amount in future?

 Will the Commission widen the campaign concept and organise a European car-free week or more
frequent car-free days (once every month or three months)?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(11 November 2002)

The 2002 European Car Free Day and European Mobility Week is being evaluated and discussed with the
representatives of the Member States, networks of local authorities, non-governmental organisations and
the European associations which are supporting and developing this initiative with the Commission.
C 110 E/106 Official Journal of the European Union EN 8.5.2003

The first evaluation results, in particular those of an opinion poll carried out in four of the participating
cities, are available online on the initiative’s website:

The main cost of European Mobility Week is EUR 551 573 to cover a 28-month grant which started on
1 January 2002. The event marking the launch of the first European Mobility Week on 16 September
2002, held in the parc du Cinquantenaire in Brussels, was organised by the Commission and cost about
EUR 12 000.

The International Car Free Day as such does not involve any further direct cost to the Community budget,
since the local and national authorities and other parties in the 37 participating countries take charge of
organising it.

No decision has yet been taken on the financing of this initiative after April 2004.

Since it falls to the participants to decide on the basis of each one’s evaluation what form the initiative is
to take in the future, it is not yet possible to answer the last part of the Honourable Member’s question.
The dates have, however, already been fixed for European Mobility Week 2003, which will take place from
16 to 22 September 2003.

(2003/C 110 E/108) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2800/02

by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission

(7 October 2002)

Subject: Clitheroe cement works, England

In view of the decision by the Commission to send the UK a reasoned opinion for the failure to undertake
an environmental impact assessment with regard to a change in the fuel used at cement kilns at Clitheroe
in Lancashire, is it the Commission’s intention to insist upon remedial works or the imposition of new
conditions to curtail the burning of hazardous waste at this location?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(19 November 2002)

The Honourable Member refers to the Reasoned Opinion of the Commission in relation to cement kilns at
Clitheroe in Lancashire. This concerns the implementation in British law of Council Directive 85/337/EEC
of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the
environment (1) in its original form and also as amended by Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March
1997 (2).

The Reasoned Opinion was issued under Article 226 of the EC Treaty because the Commission is of the
opinion that the British Government is not correctly applying Directive 85/337/EEC. In particular, the
Commission is concerned that the United Kingdom’s use of so called ‘material change of use’ provisions in
planning law may preclude a decision in accordance with the criteria in Directive 85/337/EEC as to
whether a new project, or change in a project, requires an environmental impact assessment. In addition,
the system for issuing pollution control authorisations in the United Kingdom has not been required to
comply with Directive 85/337/EEC (which has only been incorporated into the land-use planning system),
as required by Directive 85/337/EEC. These concerns came to light as a result of various complaints,
including the one relating to a cement kiln in Clitheroe. However, the main focus of the Commission’s
action under Article 226 of the EC Treaty is to ensure that the United Kingdom correctly aligns its
legislation to Directive 85/337/EEC rather than upon remedial works or the imposition of new conditions
to curtail the burning of hazardous waste in Clitheroe.

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.

(2) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997.