Stenograma dezbaterilor

Miercuri, 22 octombrie 2008 - Strasbourg

13. Timpul afectat întrebărilor (întrebări adresate Comisiei)

  President. − The next item is Question Time (B6-0475/2008).

The following questions are addressed to the Commission.

Part one

Question No 40 by Armando França (H-0733/08)

Subject: Anti-drugs strategy

The implementation of the strategic anti-drugs campaign is grounded in two action plans, for two distinct periods, i.e. 2005-2008 and 2009-2012. Also foreseen is an 'impact assessment' in 2008, to precede the action plan for 2009-2012, on the basis of a clear timetable.

The current state of affairs regarding drugs in the EU is disturbing, and the specific means chosen to fight the problem need to be extremely rigorous, firm, persistent and consistent.

What is the Commission's diagnosis, on the basis of the reports for 2005, 2006 and 2007, of the current situation, and what has been the level of execution of actions between 2005 and the present?

What is the state of play as regards the impact assessment which is to be concluded in 2008? What is the Commission's forecast for the period 2009-2013, especially concerning new instruments for combat and cooperation in police and legal terms, and also the participation of civil society?

  Siim Kallas, Vice-President of the Commission. −Madam President, it is clear that nobody can be complacent about the issue of drugs. The Commission adopted on 18 September 2008 a proposal for a European Union Drugs Action Plan 2009-2012, and a report on the final evaluation of the EU Drugs Action Plan 2005-2008 was annexed. This is the impact assessment which was mentioned in the question.

Both documents were made available to Parliament on that date. The evaluation was conducted by the European Commission in the first half of 2008 in line with Action 45.3 of the subsequent Action Plan. The evaluation provided important input for the new Action Plan. Findings include the following.

Regarding the implementation of the new EU Drugs Action Plan, the conclusion can be drawn that progress has been made on nearly all specific objectives and actions with varying degrees of success. The EU Drugs Action Plan is adequately reflected in the national policies of the Member States and has been translated into national policy and/or these objectives were already reflected in existing documents.

Member States report that the Action Plan reflects the main policy fields at national level. The evaluation shows that the Action Plan supports a process of convergence between Member States’ drug policies, which the Commission considers quite important.

Regarding the drug situation, there has not been a significant reduction in the prevalence of drug use but the use of some of the most prevalent drugs seems to have stabilisedand/or fallen slightly. The use of cocaine is showing an upward trend in some Member States. The long-term EU trend in the prevalence of drug-related infectious diseases, especially HIV and AIDS infections, is that these have been reduced in recent years, as have drug-related deaths.

New trends in drug use, especially poly-drug use, have emerged in recent years. The numbers and size of cocaine seizures are rising while for herbal cannabis, heroin, ecstasy and amphetamines, seizures appear to be stabilising.Prices for illicit substances in general have fallen, while purity levels seem to be fairly stable.

Regarding the impact of the Action Plan on the drug situation, the impact assessment to which the honourable Member refers is, I presume, the evaluation report regarding implementation. The ongoing reduction in drug-related infectious diseases and drug-related deaths on the one hand, and the EU-wide implementation of harm-reduction measures on the other, suggest a clear correlation with the Action Plans, even though such a link is notoriously hard to prove beyond any reasonable doubt.

Some Member States have achieved dramatic reductions in drug-related health harm after the introduction of harm-reduction measures. Similar conclusions can be drawn in the fields of supply reduction and European coordination and cooperation in anti-drugs law enforcement.

  Armando França (PSE).- Senhora Presidente, muito obrigado, uma saudação, em especial, aos representantes da Comissão, principalmente por me terem respondido e pela qualidade da resposta.Eu li os documentos da Comissão, li os documentos com pormenor.

Preciso de fazer um pequeno preâmbulo para dizer: nós concordamos com a estratégia e o plano de acção que se debruça essencialmente sobre a oferta, em primeiro lugar, e, depois, sobre a procura. Mas é um pouco sobre a oferta que gostaria de me pronunciar.

No plano da oferta estamos muito, muito preocupados com a abundância de cocaína e estamos muito, muito preocupados, também, com a abundância de produtos sintéticos. E estamos muito, muito preocupados com fenómenos de conflitos locais entre gangs que, nalguns Estados-Membros, disputam o controlo do mercado da droga. Queria que, na medida do possível, me esclarecesse sobre quais são, em concreto, as acções que se propõem para, no que respeita à cooperação entre os Estados-Membros entre si e entre as organizações policiais e judiciárias dos Estados-Membros, por um lado, e por outro lado, entre os Estados-Membrosda União Europeia e os países produtores, em particular, e em especial os países produtores de cocaína. É uma área da estratégia em que temos muitas preocupações e relativamente às quais gostaríamos de ouvir respostas concretas por parte da Comissão.

  Siim Kallas, Vice-President of the Commission.−Madam President, of course cooperation between Member States in fighting drugs, drug cartels and drug crime is extremely vital and also extremely difficult because of the huge amount of money in circulation. Our first priority, as you have seen in the Action Plan, is really to fight the cocaine supply chain. We have several initiatives which foresee and arrange cooperation between producer countries in Latin America and in Western Africa in order to stop cocaine trafficking. There are special centressuch asthe Maritime Analysis and Operations Centre – Narcotics, and theCentre d’Enquête et de Coordination de la Lutte Anti-drogue enMéditerranée. Both initiatives target cocaine trafficking.

So there is cooperation and there are initiatives, but the field is difficult and the fight is hard. I must stress that there cannot be any complacency. This is more or less an endless fight. However, I am happy to report some positive consequences. Diseases have decreased, as has drug-related death.

  President. − Question No 41 by Péter Olajos (H-0755/08)

Subject: Import of poultry meat products from China

Commission Decision 2008/638/EC of 30 July 2008⁽¹⁾ amended Decision 2007/777/EC⁽²⁾ on the import of meat products from third countries. Under the earlier decision, China was permitted to export only heat-treated poultry meat products to the Community which had been treated in a hermetically sealed container to a Fo value of three or more.

At the same time, at the request of the competent Chinese authorities, the Commission approved the import of poultry meat products from China’s Shandong Province which had been treated at a lower temperature (minimum 70°C).

In the light of the above, does the Commission not consider that relaxing the rules will lead to a slackening of the European Union’s rigorous animal health, food hygiene and animal welfare regulations? Does it not think that taking such a decision, which applies to just one province of a country, is cause for concern, and does it think that the poultry meat products in question can be completely verified as coming only from Shandong Province? Does it not consider that granting the authorisation to one province will lead to a torrent of requests for the rules to be relaxed in other provinces (of which there are already indications)? Do the measures introduced not pose a risk to the situation of EU poultry farmers?

  Siim Kallas, Vice-President of the Commission.−Madam President, animal- and public-health rules applying to the export of poultry meat from China ensure an equivalent level of protection to those of the EU. These import rules guarantee that all imported products fulfil the same high standards as products from the EU Member States, not only with respect to hygiene and all aspects of consumer safety but also regarding animal health status. The principle according to which food must be safe, irrespective of its origin, is at the core of the EU approach.

The official control system in China was verified on the spot by three Commission inspections. The outcome was published on the website of DG SANCO. The inspections have shown that the competent authorities, in particular in Shandong Province, are sufficiently well structured to guarantee compliance with Community legislation as regards heat-treated poultry meat products. Furthermore, these inspection missions have also verified that the competent authorities are capable of enforcing the Community’s import requirements.

As a result of this exercise, the Chinese authorities have demonstrated to the Commission services that they can certify that consignments of heat-treated poultry meat products being exported to the European Union were produced in accordance with Community requirements and come only from Shandong Province.

All approved plants in the Community list of establishments from which imports of heat-treated poultry meat is authorised are located in Shandong Province. This was verified by the three fact-finding missions on the spot: one in 2004;two in 2006.

According to the WTO agreement on sanitary and phytosanitary measures, any third country may request authorisation for export for the totality or part of its territory to the Commission, which is considered and evaluated according to the relevant Community requirements. If the guarantees given by a third country are deemed satisfactory and are effectively verified, such requests from third countries are accepted and authorisation for export granted.

Any risk of distortion of competition towards EU poultry producers is prevented by the fact that the measures in place provide for sufficient guarantees that the heat-treated poultry meat products from certain regions are compliant with the level of protection that the EU deems necessary. Informed choice by consumers would be the answer to competitive pressure.

The Chinese authorities expressed interest in the approval by the Commission of the imports of heat-treated poultry meat from Jilin Province. To get this approval, the Chinese authorities will have to guarantee that the sanitary conditions applied to the production of heat-treated poultry meat in Jilin Provincemeets EC requirements, and the Commission will verify these guarantees by on-the-spot inspections.

  Péter Olajos (PPE-DE).- Köszönöm szépen. Köszönöm szépen, Biztos úr a választ. A probléma az, hogy idén hat ellenőrzés lett volna Kína ellen, ebből egyetlen egy sem valósult meg a mai napig. Most októberben kellett volna egy baromfiellenőrzést végrehajtani, és ez sem jött létre, mert a kínaiak nem értek rá. A kérdésem az, hogyha idén a hatból egyetlen egyet sem tudtunk végrehajtani, jövőre pedig tizenötöt terveztünk be, akkor hogy fogják ezt a tizenötöt végrehajtani? És ha a kínaiak nem együttműködők az európai féllel, akkor miért nyitjuk ki az importkapukat Kína számára, és miért tesszük tönkre az európai baromfitermelőket? Ha Kína nem működik együtt, akkor nekünk sem kell megnyitnunk az importkapukat, ez a véleményem. Köszönöm szépen.

  Siim Kallas, Vice-President of the Commission.−First of all I want to say that China is willing to cooperate, and we have no indications that China is not willing to cooperate. Secondly,as regards the inspections and missions, these missions havebeen considered satisfactory so far.Whenever there are doubts or questions,we willhave new missions.The time between the last missions and this year was due to administrative activities in China between two ministries.However – at least on the Commission side – we cannot say that there is any reluctance to cooperate with us concerning standards and the quality of the products.

If there are indications, the Commission is ready to organise new missions. So far these have not been considered necessary.

  Jim Allister (NI).- Commissioner, I hear what you say but it does have echoes of the Brazilian beef controversy, when for months the Commission stood where you stand today and assured us that all was well, and then was finally driven to the position of having to impose a ban.

You have said that this meat will be subjected to similar tests. Can you say, without reservation, that every piece of meat imported will be equally subjected to the same rigorous veterinary tests as are required of our own producers? Will the same ratio of production be tested, and how will you know if the product is truly from Shandong Province?Is it enough if it is merely processed there?Those are the issues that give rise to resentment by our producers, that they are subjected to all sorts of requirements,including the phasing-out of cages. Will that happen in China at the same rate? They believe themselves undercut by cheap imports.

  Armando França (PSE).- Obrigado, Senhora Presidente, serei breve. A minha questão ia um pouco no sentido da do colega. Concordo que tenha havido - e tem havido recentemente - um esforço de fiscalização e de vigilância e é indispensável que o esforço de vigilância e fiscalização continue. Mas suponho, também, que não poderá haver tréguas em matéria de regulamentação, de reforço da regulamentação, com regras precisas e claras da União Europeia, e a sua extensão a todo o território da China e não apenas uma incidência, em particular, a alguma das províncias, como o colega há momentos referiu. Um esclarecimento sobre isso, muito agradeço, Senhora Comissária.

  Siim Kallas, Vice-Presidentof the Commission.−So far all products produced in this province have been labelled. The authorities in this province are responsible for quality and also rules of origin.

Of course, there is always the question that not every chicken can be checked – this is also the case in the European Union.But what the Commission can do in its inspections – and I was told that the next inspection will take place next year, so it has already been planned – is to verify that the administrative systems are capable of controlling how this poultry is produced and what the level of animal health protection is.So far the answers have been found to be satisfactory.

Of course, there will be a continuous checking of facts, but these are the World Trade Organisation rules, and we always have benefited from openness. Quality is important; standards are important. So far we are convinced that the quality of poultry products from China is satisfactory, and the next province is, as I have already mentioned, also willing to come.

  President. − Question No 42 by Ona Jukneviciene (H-0786/08)

Subject: Implementation of the European Social Fund in the Member States

The European Social Fund (ESF) as one of the EU's Structural Funds was set up to reduce differences in prosperity and living standards across EU Member States and regions, with the aim of promoting employment as well as economic and social cohesion. Over the period 2007-2013 some €75 billion will be distributed to the EU Member States and regions to achieve its goals. Member States finance a number of different programmes, and in this regard it is important to know how the Member States, especially the new ones, are using the available funding and what results have been achieved in raising living standards and promoting employment.

Is the Commission planning to publish a communication on the implementation of the ESF in the Member States and if so, when can we expect such a communication? If the Commission plans to release such a communication, can we expect to see both qualitative and quantitative analyses of the use of the ESF funds? It is of crucial importance to know not only how much money was spent on implementing various programmes but to ensure that the EU citizens enjoy tangible and sustainable benefits as well.

If the Commission is not planning such a communication, why is this, and how can the Commission then guarantee transparent and efficient use of the ESF?

  Siim Kallas, Vice-President of the Commission.−The Commission recalls that Article 146 of the EC Treaty establishes the European Social Fund in order to improve employment opportunities for workers in the internal market and thereby to contribute to raising the standard of living. The Social Fund also pursues actions leading to the strengthening of its economic and social cohesion.

The Commission agrees with the honourable Member on the importance of reporting on the concrete benefits of the European Social Fund. In this context, the Commission intends to present a series of thematic reports on the European Social Fund’s support and activities, the beneficiaries reached and the results achieved. The first set of reports should be available in early 2009.

In addition, Article 159 of the EC Treaty provides that the Commission shall submit a report to the European Parliament, the Council, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions every three years on progress made towards achieving economic and social cohesion. The last Cohesion Report was published in 2007 and paid particular attention to the issue of investment in people. The next Cohesion Report will be presented in 2010. In addition, the Commission will publish a so-called ‘Progress Report’ in the intervening years.

  Ona Juknevičienė (ALDE).- I am very satisfied with your very precise and concrete answer, so thank you very much indeed. I do appreciate that the Commission considers that the question I raised is important, not only to parliamentarians, but to the Commission as well. I believe, however, that this is the most important to our people.They have to know about the transparency of use of these funds and the efficiency of use of these funds. I will, therefore, be waiting for the report in early 2009.

Could you please advice me which DG will prepare this report in 2009?

  Siim Kallas, Vice-President of the Commission.−It is DG Employment, under my good colleague Mr Špidla, that is responsible for these reports. The numbers are interesting and we give training to nine million people in Europe every year, so the benefits are there.

  Zita Pleštinská (PPE-DE).- Výdavky spojené s výstavbou alebo s rekonštrukciou sa dajú skontrolovať. Pri projektoch z Európskeho sociálneho fondu cieľová skupina získa know-how, nové zručnosti a znalosti, preto zúčtovanie položiek je závislé od subjektívneho prístupu úradníka. Nesolventnosť NGO a samosprávnych orgánov spôsobená byrokratickými praktikami členských štátov často bráni príjemcom zEurópskeho sociálneho fondu, aby sa zapojili do ďalších aktivít v rámci tohto programu. Aké nástroje má v rukách Komisia, aby členské štáty nestanovovali nadmerné administratívne prekážky pri uhrádzaní nákladov na dokončené projekty zEurópskeho sociálneho fondu?

  Gay Mitchell (PPE-DE).- Could I ask the Commissioner if he might, in these times when recession is snapping at our heels, look at the possibility of the Social Fund cooperating with local development partnership boards where these exist in Member States like the Republic of Ireland, but in other Member States as well? In that regard, he might have discussions with the OECD, which has carried out a study of the effectiveness of local development in promoting training, education, micro-job creation and an improved environment for people who find themselves unemployed.

I do not expect the Commissioner to be able to answer all of that today, but what I am really asking is that he would look at this possibility and perhaps consult with the OECD to see how the Social Fund and social partnership and local development partnerships might work handinhand to improve the community training and employment needs of our citizens, particularly in urban areas.

  Siim Kallas, Vice-President of the Commission.−Firstly,about bureaucracy and the administrative burden:they exists,no doubt. As I said,my colleague Mr Špidla is responsible for spending the money,and I am responsible for discharge: ensuring that no money is wasted. This is always a dilemma.

We try to be as flexible as possible, but at the same time the benefits and possible outcomesare also carefully audited by national authorities, by paying agencies and probably by the ministry responsible.This also includes the European Court of Auditors and our DG, so there are different layers of control as well.

The result is assessed by large public participation, and projects must be seen,so now we have an obligation to have everything published on the website about the financing so that everyone can follow it.The Social Fund, however, is mainly financing training.

In responseto the next question: there is cooperation between different sources of financing structural funds, including the Social Fund and regional development funds and, in my country at least, theyare in very close cooperation with each other.This cooperation depends on national authorities. We can only support good cooperation and the efficient use of money.

Part two

  President. − Question No 43 by Dimitrios Papadimoulis (H-0746/08)

Subject: Community co-financed projects and Siemens' slush funds

The Greek and German judicial authorities are continuing to investigate the case of the Siemens' slush funds, which were used by the firm to bribe political parties and persons in authority in order to obtain major public sector works and supply contracts. The German courts have already convicted a former senior executive of the company, who has admitted that slush funds also existed in Greece.

Given that these bribes may well relate to Community co-funded projects, will the Commission say whether OLAF or any other of its services is investigating the legality of the award procedures and implementation of such projects?

  Siim Kallas, Vice-President of the Commission.−These issues are always very complicated and serious. The European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) is competent to investigate, where EU funds are involved, when there are sufficiently serious suspicions of fraud or irregularity having been committed against the financial interests of the European Union.

In cases where projects are co-funded by EU funds – such as is the situation with structural funds – the Member States and the Commission share the responsibilities in the management of these funds. In this regard, it is the Member States that are primarily responsible for distribution of the expenditure and the necessary controls. Moreover, resulting from such controls and investigations and the communication of possible cases of fraud or irregularity to OLAF, the honourable Member may be aware that there are regulatory arrangements in place under Regulation (EC) No 1681/94, which provides that the Member States shall report to the Commission, at the appropriate stage, the details of their investigation into such possible cases of fraud or irregularity. Moreover, whenever it is deemed appropriate, OLAF liaises closely with the competent national authorities on progress in such matters.

In the matters referred to by the honourable Member, the Commission has been informed by OLAF that it is aware of ongoing cases in Germany and Greece but that, until now, OLAF’s direct assistance in matters involving Siemens in Germany and/or Greece in respect of structural funds has not been requested by the judicial authorities of either Member State. In addition, the Commission would refer to the reply already given to the honourable Member’s written question, which stipulated that, according to Article3 of Regulation (Euratom, EC) No 2185/96, economic operators are not being controlled by both the Commission and Member States’ authorities at the same time and on the basis of the same facts, according to Community sector regulations or national legislation. Besides, the Commission may, at any moment, start an infringement procedure against the Member States, on the basis of Article 226 of the EC Treaty,if there are sufficient elements indicating an infringement of Community public procurement law. In respect of the particular matters referred to by the honourable Member, the Commission has no such elements that could justify the opening of an infringement procedure.

  Δημήτριος Παπαδημούλης (GUE/NGL).- Κύριε Επίτροπε, αυτό ακριβώς σας ερωτώ. Ξέρετε πολύ καλά ότι η Siemens, μία μεγάλη και ιστορική εταιρία, έχει πάρει δουλειές πολλών εκατομμυρίων ευρώ από συγχρηματοδοτούμενα προγράμματα. Εδρεύει στη Γερμανία και έχει πάρει δουλειές και στην Ελλάδα και αλλού. Υπάρχουν καταδίκες και ομολογίες ότι χρησιμοποίησε μεθόδους διαφθοράς, μαύρο πολιτικό χρήμα.

Πώς είσαστε τόσο σίγουροι ότι δεν χρησιμοποίησε τις ίδιες μεθόδους και τα ίδια μαύρα ταμεία και για τα συγχρηματοδοτούμεναπρογράμματα; Κύριε Επίτροπε, ως πότε θα κρύβεστε πίσω από τη δικαστική έρευνα που διεξάγεται στη Γερμανία και στην Ελλάδα; Μπορείτε να δράσετε και με δική σας πρωτοβουλία. Σκοπεύετε να ζητήσετε εσείς, ως αρμόδιος Επίτροπος, από την OLAF να ερευνήσει το θέμα ήθα περιμένετε αδρανής γιατί φοβόσαστε τον κολοσσό που λέγεται Siemens;

  Siim Kallas, Vice-President of the Commission.−No, I am not afraid of Siemens and I will happily send OLAF to investigate these cases, but of course there is a clear legal framework in which we can operate and can go to investigate. We are following the situation, as I said, and we can urge Member States and we can demand that they inform us(they have, anyway, the obligation to inform us) and move actively.But there must, at present, be an indication and request from Member States for OLAF assistance.So far this has not been the case, but we will follow the situation.

We have clear and sometimes very sensitive divisions of responsibilities and obligations between Member States and Community bodies.This is particularly the case where the investigation rules are very precisely defined.

  President. − As the author of Question 44, Mr Heaton-Harris, is not present, that question falls.

Question No 45 by Nirj Deva (H-0752/08)

Subject: Administrative affairs and the Lisbon Treaty

Could the Commission detail the changes to the EU competences held by DG Admin that the Lisbon Treaty would have brought in? Does the Commission have any plans to introduce any of those reforms?

  Siim Kallas, Vice-President of the Commission.−The Lisbon Treaty contains three main provisions of the amended Treaty on the functioning of the European Union which deal with administrative affairs: Article 197 on administrative cooperation, Article 298 on an open, efficient and independent European administration and Article 336 on the Staff Regulations.

Article 197 provides for the Union to take measures, excluding any harmonisation, to support the efforts of Member States to improve their capacity to implement Union law. Article 336 is amended to change the procedure for adopting the Institutions’ Staff Regulations to ordinary legislative procedure – that means normal codecision – currently, the Council acts by qualified majority vote on a proposal from the Commission, after consulting the other institution.

The new Article 298 requires the adoption of regulations ensuring an ‘open, efficient and independent European administration’, which is what we are already trying to do without waiting for the final entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty.

  Nirj Deva (PPE-DE).- Can I thank the Commissioner for his very clear answer and congratulate him on implementing an open and efficient way of running the Commission, in spite of the fact that the Lisbon Treaty will never see the light of day?

But, having said that, does the Commission have any plans to introduce any of those reforms which may not need the Lisbon Treaty to be enforced –for example, on improving the capacity to implement EU law on the Staff Regulations?

  Siim Kallas, Vice-President of the Commission.−I must say, honourable Member, that we are trying to improve the work of the administration every day, and at this moment I am having intensive debate with our staff unions about the regulations concerning parliamentary assistants, which is also part of the Staff Regulations.This definitely brings more transparency and more clarity to this – so far – problematic field. So we are very happy that we have opened many websites which tremendously improve the transparency of our activities.

So this work is ongoing. Concerning the Staff Regulations – which is a solid document – this is a huge and complicated project if we really aim to make changes.We will probably discuss with Parliament possible changes during next term, but small reforms are ongoing. Internally we have just changed the rules onthe so-called ‘career development reviews’.So there are ongoing changes every day, practically.

  Reinhard Rack (PPE-DE).- Herr Kommissar, Sie haben darauf hingewiesen, dass die Kommission ihre Regeln bezüglich der Verwaltungpermanent ändern und verbessern will und muss. Eine Entwicklung in den letzten Jahren gibt hier wirklich Anlass zur Sorge, nämlich dass sehr viel und eigentlich immer mehr auf Agenturen und sonstige Verwaltungseinheiten ausgelagert wird. Wird nicht hier der Grundsatz der Einheitlichkeit der Verwaltung und vor allem der Einheitlichkeit der politischen Kontrolle über diese Verwaltung durchbrochen?

  Siim Kallas, Vice-President of the Commission.− This is a good question,one which has often been discussed in the parliamentary Committee on Budgetary Control as well. As theCommissioner responsible for administration and audit and the fight against fraud I am, of course, very concerned;my colleague Dalia Grybauskaitėand I always ask questions about the necessity of the creation of new bodies, and we insist that the rules which cover the new bodies are as transparent and as clear as they are in our main bodies and headquarters.

Having agencies which can be more flexible and more precise in implementingEU policies is mainly a policy-making decision.It is very much discussed here in Parliament and supported on many separate occasions.

I can be the bureaucrat who alwaysraises questions on how to audit and how to control these agencies, but at the same time I do not think that acertain distribution of EU institutions or a certain spreading of EU institutions in Europe is a bad idea.So let us balance and weigh both sides: the policy-making needs and gains on one side and administrative clarity and auditing clarity onthe other. We have tried in all decisions to achieve a certain balance.

  President. − Question No 46 by Ryszard Czarnecki (H-0789/08)

Subject: Abuses and corruption by EU officials

Every so often, European public opinion is rocked by reports of abuses and corruption by EU officials. Can the Commission provide details of the scale of this problem over recent months, over this year as a whole and over last year, and in comparison with previous years?

  Siim Kallas, Vice-President of the Commission.−I must first say that the Commission has no indications that there are more cases of fraud than in other organisations. The Commission points out that the British House of Lords concluded in a special report that there was no evidence of widespread corruption within the Commission and that the level of fraud against the EU budget is no higher than in comparable public spending programmes, including in Great Britain.

On average, OLAF opens around 40 internal investigations per year involving officials from all Institutions. In around half of these cases it concludes there is a need for follow-up, which can be administrative, disciplinary, judicial, financial or even legislative or a combination of several of these.

The Commission’s policy of zero tolerance and a formal obligation for officials to report serious wrongdoings without delay contributes to increased vigilance towards possible fraud or corruption. It may also lead to the opening of a significant number of investigations in which the initial suspicions ultimately prove to be groundless.

As concerns the Commission, 15 members of staff were subject to disciplinary measures in 2007, compared to an average of five staff members between 2004 and 2006. In 2007 sanctions were imposed in seven cases for a variety of breaches, including for external activities not in accordance with the dignity of the function, unauthorised absences and financial irregularities.

The staff rules provide a well-developed disciplinary system, with possible sanctions ranging from a simple warning to downgrading and, in the most serious cases, dismissal with or without reduction of pension rights. In addition, a member of staff may be held personally financially liable for the damage incurred by his or her serious personal misconduct.

  Ryszard Czarnecki (UEN).- Pani Przewodnicząca! Panie Komisarzu, niepotrzebnie Pan przyjął taką postawę defensywną. Oczywiście obecna Komisja może szczycić się tym, że w porównaniu z Komisją pana Santera jest niemal jak Święty Franciszek. Natomiast chodzi mi jeszcze o jedną rzecz - mianowicie o to, czy były przypadki aresztowań i procesów, a nie tylko zwolnień z pracyurzędników administracji unijnej.

  Siim Kallas, Vice-President of the Commission.−As I said, we have some cases running but so far we have notcompleted any criminal cases during the last six years. No European Commission official has been convicted. We have some ongoing cases but these are all in national judiciaries. In addition, since 2002, the Commission has lifted immunity. If an official is to be investigated, the Commission makes the decision to lift immunity. We have lifted immunity – for criminal cases in courts – from 35 people, and so far half of them have been acquitted and the cases have been closed. Some cases are still running and there have been no criminal convictions yet. This is the situation regarding criminal cases against Commission officials. We are quite convinced that there will also be some convictions, but in some national judiciaries it takes a very long time. We are definitely cooperating with all these investigations.

  Reinhard Rack (PPE-DE).- Herr Kommissar, Sie haben gerade darauf hingewiesen, dass natürlich auch Korruption als gerichtlich zu ahnendes Delikt in der weiteren Folge von nationalen Justizbehörden zu verfolgen ist. Sind hier die meisten Fälle – wie ich annehme – belgische Gerichtsverfahren, oder gibt es auch strafgerichtliche Verfahren wegen korrupten Verhaltens von Beamten in anderen Mitgliedstaaten?

  Siim Kallas, Vice-President of the Commission.− Most, maybe all, the cases are in the Belgian courts, because the officials are located in Belgium. Therefore most of the cases are in Belgium –and Luxembourg as well.

  President. − As they deal with the same subject, the following questions will be taken together:

Question No 47 by Eoin Ryan (H-0712/08)

Subject: CCCTB impact assessment

In his address to the ECON Committee in June of this year, Commissioner Kovacs referred to a CCCTB impact assessment, which he described as 'crucial' for his proposed legislative proposal. Can the Commission give us more details about this impact assessment and confirm that if it proves unfavourable to the CCCTB proposal the Commission will shelve the plans for such a legislative proposal?

Question No 48 by Marian Harkin (H-0724/08)

Subject: CCCTB

What is the current situation with regard to the deliberations on the introduction of a common consolidated tax base and, in light of the concerns expressed by the Irish electorate in the Lisbon vote on this matter, has the Commission modified its approach in any way?

  László Kovács, Member of the Commission.−An impact assessment of the Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) is currently being carried out. This assessment will cover a number of possible options for an EU-level reform of the corporate income tax system.

In accordance with the current practice of the Commission, a proposal of this nature has to be accompanied by an impact assessment drafted in compliance with the key analytical steps laid down in the Impact Assessment Guidelines. The key analytical steps are to identify the problem, to define the objectives, to develop main policy options, to analyse their impacts, to compare the options and to outline policy monitoring and evaluation.

The assessment will provide a description and evidence of the existing cross-border company tax obstacles on the internal market, and will define the objectives to be achieved by the reform. A number of alternative policy options, including the CCCTB, that could address the obstacles will be analysed and their respective economic, environmental and social impacts assessed.

As regards the most relevant types of impacts of the various policy options, the assessment will aim to assess: (a)the economy-wide effects of the alternative tax reforms on the competitiveness of the EU, on growth of the EU economy and welfare; (b) their respective effects on companies’ compliance costs; and (c), notably, their respective impacts on national corporate tax bases and on tax administration costs.

Significant progress has been achieved in preparing the impact assessment but the work is not yet completed. Once the impact assessment is finalised, and the different options assessed, the Commission will draw the necessary conclusions. The fact that the Commission carries out an impact assessment does not necessarily mean that a proposal will follow.

  Eoin Ryan (UEN).- To say that I am disappointed in the answer is to put it mildly: that is exactly what you told us last June. You told us that we would have this in September. I have to say that there are very strong rumours that you have received an interim report on CCCTB. You have not officially accepted it, but I gather that thisreport is not favourable towards the idea of CCCTB and the reason we cannot see it is because you have not formally accepted it.

I would like to ask you ifthat is the case, because it is extremely unfair since this is an issue that has been debated for some considerable time now. There is a lot of very strong feeling on both sides on it, and I believe that you should show us that report, or interim report, so that we can have a look at it to see where exactly that report stands on this very,very important issue. I would strongly ask you to do that. I think it is wrong if you have received an interim report and you are not showing it to us because it does not show what the Commission wants on this issue.

  Marian Harkin (ALDE).- I want to echo the Mr Ryan’s comments.The specific question that was asked was: if the assessment proves unfavourable, will you shelve the plans for implementing CCCTB? And that question was not answered.

Also, there have been a number of other assessments – not, obviously, carried out by the Commission – which have shown that, in many ways, CCCTB would collapse under its own weight.

But, given that you have not answered the question that was asked, I want to put one or two others to you. Would you not agree that it is not simplification? At present we have 27 tax bases. With CCCTB we would end up with 28. If it were to operate, would you not agree that it would damage Europe’s capacity to attract foreign direct investment, in that tax payable by multinationals in one country would no longer be determined by the law of that state but by reference to a complicated formula which can only be computed in retrospect? So, in other words, no policy certainty, and that will scare foreign direct investment like nothing else. I just want your view on that, please, Commissioner.

  László Kovács, Member of the Commission.−Yes, it is true that we have been aiming to make a proposal in the autumn of this year, but you have to understand that, in a project as ambitious as the CCCTB, it is not possible to predict exactly when we will be ready to make the proposal, as the timing of the proposal depends on the finalisation of the impact assessments and its evolution by the Commission.

As far as the correlation between the Irish referendum on the Lisbon Treaty and the CCCTB is concerned, I want to emphasise that the Commission is taking a measured approach based on wide consultation and detailed study of all aspects of the CCCTB.The Commission is aware of the issues raised by the electorate during the referendum in Ireland relating to the Lisbon Treaty. However, I would point out that the provisions of the Lisbon Treaty do not have any direct influence on the process whereby Member States would eventually decide on any proposal on a possible Commission proposal for CCCTB.

(Interjection from the floor by Eoin Ryan)

  President. − I am sorry, Mr Ryan. The Rules allow you a supplementary question. I will not give you the floor.

  President. − Question No 49 by Georgios Papastamkos (H-0716/08)

Subject: EU-China customs cooperation

What is the Commission’s assessment of the level of organisation and effectiveness of customs cooperation between the EU and China?

  László Kovács, Member of the Commission.−Madam President, may I take the liberty of answering Mr Ryan’s comments very briefly? I just want to tell you that you will soon receive a full, legally based answer from the Head of my Cabinet Office. Then you will understand our position.

Concerning the second issue, customs cooperation is an important part of the EU-China strategic partnership.The EC-China Agreement on Customs Cooperation and Mutual Administrative Assistance with China provides the legal basis for this cooperation. The EC-China Joint Customs Cooperation Committee meets once a year in order to manage and oversee the implementation of the Agreement.

Under the Customs Cooperation Agreement, the EC and China are developing substantial interaction in key customs areas, organised clearly to reflect the interest of the European Community.

The problem of counterfeiting is our key priority in relation to China, which is the number one source of fakes entering the EU external borders. During my visits to Beijing in January and April 2008, I agreed with my Chinese counterparts to develop an ambitious Action Plan for IPR enforcement with concrete objectives and measures to be adopted by the EU-China Summit in December. It should include, among other things, an information exchange system on IPR risks, an exchange programme of operational officials, and collaboration on the development of partnerships with business communities in China and the European Union.

Securing the supply chain is another essential aspect of EC-China customs cooperation. The joint pilot project on Safe and Secure Trade Lane has been running since November 2007 with the participation of three ports, Shenzhen in China, Rotterdam in the Netherlands and Felixstowe in the United Kingdom.

This project aims at strengthening security while facilitating trade between the EC and China through the use of modern technology and the exchange of advance information. At the same time, it will help to better target the traffic in illicit goods. Furthermore, the pilot project aims at preparing the ground for a future agreement on mutual recognition of security measures and the Authorised Economic Operator (AEO) and its Chinese opposite number. It involves cooperation in such important fields as alignment of the Chinese security legislation, information exchange and risk analysis. China has in the meantime adopted and implemented, as of 1 April 2008, its own AEO legislation that appears very similar to the European Community concept.

The EC and China are also enhancing cooperation in other important areas. An EU-China agreement on coordinated controls of trade in drug precursors is expected to be signed at the upcoming EU-China Summit that will allow us to combat trade in illicit drugs more effectively.

We agreed to further enhance our cooperation to fight fraud through the established mutual assistance mechanism.

The European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) has posted one of its agents in China in order to support the anti-contraband and anti-counterfeit activities of the office, in particular in relation to cigarette smuggling.

The EU is ready to continue to assist China in customs capacity building, including through the application of the recently published customs blueprints.

While we have made considerable progress in enhancing customs cooperation with China, further steps need to be taken, particularly with regard to combating counterfeit and piracy. Proper implementation of the above-mentioned initiatives, in particular the proposed IPR enforcement action plan, will determine the level of effectiveness of this cooperation.

  Γεώργιος Παπαστάμκος (PPE-DE).- Κύριε Επίτροπε, σας ευχαριστώ για την απάντησή σας. Το εμπορικό έλλειμμα στις σχέσεις ΕΕ-Κίνας ανήλθε το 2007 σε 160 δισεκατομμύρια ευρώ εις βάρος της Ένωσης. Το έλλειμμα αυτό, ως ένα μεγάλο βαθμό, είναι επίσης απόρροια της ατελούς τελωνειακής συνεργασίας στις σχέσεις ΕΕ-Κίνας. Πέραν της γλώσσας των αριθμών, μας ενδιαφέρει πάρα πολύ – και είναι εύλογο αυτό – η δημόσια υγεία, η προστασία των ευρωπαίων καταναλωτών αλλά, βεβαίως, και η ανταγωνιστικότητα των ευρωπαϊκών προϊόντων.

Πιστεύω ότι στο εγγύς μέλλον θα εντατικοποιηθούν αυτοί οι έλεγχοι ώστε να προστατεύσουμε τα δημόσια αγαθά στα οποία αναφέρθηκα.

  László Kovács, Member of the Commission.−I fully agree with your concern –in my view, counterfeiting is much more than a financial problem.

First of all, it is a legal issue: the violation of intellectual property right.

Second, it is a financial or economic problem as it undermines the revenue of the Member States and it also undermines the profit of the manufacturing company of the original products and it can even result in the loss of jobs in our Member States.

But third – and this is my real concern – it is a new threat to the safety and to the health – and even to the life – of our citizens, so, as you very clearly emphasised, it is an issue of consumer protection. When I first got the information that EU customs seized some consignments of medicines, pharmaceuticals, against cardiovascular diseases, and the capsules contained brick powder and yellow paint, I was really shocked.

So it is much more than a financial or legal issue. It is a problem of the safety of our citizens and we have got to do our best.

May I say that I am now more optimistic:in April, I met my new counterpart, the new minister responsible for customs in China. Even with my former counterpart I felt some positive changes in the Chinese style, the way they negotiated. Since 2005, it has become more and more concrete, more and more to the point and China has made some steps. For instance they even changed the legislation concerning combating counterfeiting.

But, you are right that it is still not working in an optimum manner. That was the reason why we initiated an action programme and I made it very clear to my new partner that what we expect from China is concrete measures and concrete results in the market and I think that he understood the message.

One or two more reasons about why I am optimistic: first, China, which is an emerging power, which is playing a more and more important role in the world economy and world politics, I think simply cannot afford to be related, to be judged as the number one source of fake products. Second, China is more and more a target country. Quite recently we heard about Chinese fake milk powder which resulted in the death of some Chinese children. So they are not only a country of origin, but they are also a target country, a target of counterfeiters.

  Avril Doyle (PPE-DE).- As a member of the European Parliament’s Delegation for relations with the People’s Republic of China, I have noted with interest your response.

Has there been any improvement at all in China’s appalling record on counterfeiting or the stealing of intellectual property since it joined the WTO, and what pressures are being put on China to improve in this area?

You mentioned the EC-China Joint Customs Committee. Who is on it from the EC side, and what are the qualifications to become a member?

My final point: does this joint committee have terms of reference to handle trade of various waste products from Europe to China for dumping?

  László Kovács, Member of the Commission.−One of the figures I can refer to in my answer is that in 2005 more than 80% of seized fake products came from China. Now this proportion is around 60%. I think it would be premature to say that it is due to the Customs Cooperation Agreement and it is the result of the yearly meeting of the Customs Cooperation Committee, but I am pretty sure that there is certainly some correlation between the two.

As I have already said,there have been changes in Chinese legislation:production and distribution of fake goods are now an element of the penal code,which was not the case before, andexportcontrols havealso been introduced.I would not say that this export control is systematic and full-scale.It is rather sporadic and occasional, but it is a step forward.These are the concrete facts which show that China is becoming more cooperative and taking it more seriously. I have already spoken about Chinese motivation.

As far as the Joint Customs Cooperation Committee is concerned, the co-chairs are the Minister on the Chinese side, and myself on the EU or EC side, but also in the joint committee,all the Member States are represented at expertlevel. They have more than one meeting at expert level a year. Once a year the two chairs of the joint committee also come together and discuss the issues.

  President. − Question No 50 by Sean Ó Neachtain (H-0708/08)

Subject: Financing security measures at European regional airports

By the end of 2008, the Commission is expected to publish a report on financing security measures at European airports, which may lead to a new legislative proposal on this issue.

Given that security expenditure constitutes a heavy burden for European regional airports, can the Commission say what kind of solutions it considers necessary to help regional airports manage the increasing costs of security? In addition, does the Commission plan to introduce new measures that will oblige all Member States to finance in part security at Europe’s regional airports?

  Antonio Tajani, Vicepresidente della Commissione.− Signor presidente, in sintonia con l'impegno stabilito dall'articolo 22 del regolamento n. 300 del 2008, quello relativo all'istituzione di norma comuni per la sicurezza dell'aviazione civile che abroga il vecchio regolamento, nel dicembre di quest'anno la Commissione presenterà una relazione sul finanziamento dei costi connessi alle misure di sicurezza negli aeroporti europei.

Vista la situazione, la Commissione sta valutando i risultanti della consultazione con le parti interessate e con gli Stati membri per determinare i contenuti di una nuova proposta legislativa in materia. La Commissione presenterà le sue conclusioni nella relazione in questione e, per affrontare alcune delle questioni sollevate nel corso delle consultazioni, la Commissione potrebbe essere chiamata anche ad effettuare nuovi interventi in materia.

  Seán Ó Neachtain (UEN).- A Uachtaráin, ba mhaith liom níos mó a fháil amach. Céard go díreach atá i gceist ag an gCoimisiún a dhéanamh chun cabhrú le haerfoirt atá buailte ag an gcostas seo. Tá cúig aerfort i mo thoghcheantar in Iarthar na hÉireann agus tá sé an-deacair acu maireachtáil go heacnamúil mar gheall ar an mbrú atá orthu: dhá aerfort idirnáisiúnta, an tSionainn agus Aerfort Iarthar na hÉireann agus trí aerfort réigiúnacha. Céard is féidir leis an gCoimisiún a dhéanamh chun cabhrú leo seo maireachtáil agus a bheith eacnamúil?

  Antonio Tajani, Vicepresidente della Commissione.−Onorevole, mi dispiace non poter dare una risposta immediata e concreta come vorrei. Però la Commissione sta valutando i risultati di una consultazione che ha effettuato per valutare i risultati e quindi decidere se, come, in che parte, rispetto agli Stati nazionali, se spetta soltanto agli Stati nazionali, serve terminare la valutazione delle consultazioni.

Appena avremo terminato la valutazione delle consultazioni, se lei riterrà opportuno, sarà mia premura informarla e comunque presenteremo entro la fine dell'anno, come ho detto nella risposta, una relazione che riguarderà tutto il settore. Si tratta soltanto di attendere qualche settimana per avere una valutazione definitiva da parte dei servizi delle intere consultazioni. Il mio Gabinetto e i miei servizi sono a sua disposizione per fornirle tutte le informazioni necessarie affinché lei possa riferire ai cittadini suoi elettori.

  Μανώλης Μαυρομμάτης (PPE-DE).- Κυρία Επίτροπε, λαμβάνοντας υπόψη αυτά που άκουσα από εσάς, θα υπάρξει το ενδεχόμενο να αξιολογηθούν οι ανάγκες ασφαλείας του κάθε κράτους μέλους αλλά και των περιφερειακών αεροδρομίων – γιατί αυτή ήταν η ερώτηση – όταν ο αριθμός τους είναι μεγαλύτερος, όπως, π.χ. συμβαίνει με τη νησιωτική Ελλάδα, την Ιταλία, την Ισπανία, την Πορτογαλία;

Γιατί ασφαλώς γνωρίζετε πόσα νησιά και πόσες τέτοιες περιοχές υπάρχουν και, ως εκ τούτου, η χρηματοδότηση από το σύνολο του προϋπολογισμού σας να είναι ανάλογη και διαφορετική;

  Paul Rübig (PPE-DE).- Wir wissen, dass die Kosten natürlich auf die Passagiere umgelegt werden. Aus diesem Grund ist es auch notwendig, eine Differenzierung durchzuführen. Ob man heute z. B. den Zug benutzt – sei es der TGV oder sonst eine Hochgeschwindigkeitsbahn – oder ob man ein Flugzeug benutzt, der Unterschied ist nicht allzu groß. Wenn man die Sicherheitsvorkehrungen auf den Bahnhöfen und jene auf Flughäfen ansieht, gäbe es hier vielleicht eine Annäherungsmöglichkeit. Halten Sie es für möglich, hier gleiche Rechtsvorschriften zu schaffen?

  President. − Commissioner...

(Interjection from the floor by Jim Higgins)

I am very sorry, Mr Higgins, I have taken two supplementary questions, which is all I can take, and we have dealt with it as appropriately as we can.

(Interjection from the floor by Jim Higgins)

The Rules provide for two supplementary questions. I am sorry but I cannot get into a discussion with you. It is unfair to those who have questions waiting to be heard.

  Antonio Tajani, Vicepresidente della Commissione.−Signora Presidente, vorrei dire ai parlamentari che non possono avere, in base al regolamento,delle risposte alle questioni che intendono porre, che i miei uffici sono a disposizione per fornire tutte le informazioni necessarie che siamo in grado di dare per rispondere ai loro quesiti.

Per quanto riguarda la questione posta dall'onorevole Mavrommatis – in sostanza lei chiede se possono gli Stati membri adottare misure di sicurezza più rigorose di quelle imposte dal regolamento n. 300 del 2008 – gli Stati membri, certo, possono scegliere di applicare misure più rigorose di quelle previste dal regolamento quadro. Tuttavia, queste misure più rigorose possono avere ripercussioni sul mercato interno dell'aviazione in quanto spesso variano da uno Stato membro all'altro.

Nella relazione, insisto, di prossima pubblicazione, la Commissione analizzerà se queste misure più rigorose falsano la concorrenza fra compagnie aeree e aeroporti. Per quanto riguarda la questione degli aeroporti insulari, la Commissione sta valutando, nell'ambito delle risposte che sono state fornite, anche la questione degli aeroporti insulari che sono assolutamente inseriti in questo esame, che riguarda il sistema generale aeroportuale.Lei sa quanto la Commissione ci tiene ai territori che possono essere raggiunti, come le isole del suo paese d'origine, ma anche nei paesi che conosco meglio io, soltanto grazie ad aerei o grazie a navi. Quindi su questi collegamenti la Commissione presta molta attenzione.

Per quanto riguarda invece la questione posta dall'onorevole Rübig, la Commissione sta valutando le varie ipotesi. È possibile ricorrere ai fondi pubblici, che è una delle possibili soluzioni per finanziare i costi della sicurezza dell'aviazione, quindi non è detto che si debbano aumentare i costi dei biglietti. Si può eventualmente ricorrere ad altre forme di finanziamento. Però, per essere sincero e dare una risposta che non sia una risposta soltanto formale, ripeto che i servizi stanno esaminando attentamente tutte le informazioni raccolte e, appena esaminate, valutate e bilanciate le informazioni, cercheremo di formulare una proposta che possa essere equilibrata e che possa essere in sintonia con gli interessi dei cittadini europei.

Ripeto quello che ho detto per gli altri suoi colleghi, onorevole Rübig, che i miei uffici sono comunque a disposizione sempre di tutti i parlamentari per tutti i chiarimenti e per tutti gli incontri che vorranno avere con me per quanto riguarda questioni attinenti al settore dei trasporti.

  President. − Question No 51 by Stavros Arnaoutakis (H-0713/08)

Subject: High quality transport and small island regions of the European Union

What steps will the Commission take to ensure that the European Union has sustainable and high quality transport systems and to protect the rights of its citizens and their safety? How will it contribute towards establishing a reliable system of transportation (boat-aeroplane-helicopter) which covers the small island regions of the European Union?

  Antonio Tajani, Vicepresidente della Commissione.−Signora presidente, è un po' la continuazione del discorso posto dall'onorevole Mavrommatis. Noi per assicurare un trasporto sostenibile e di buona qualità in Europa e proteggere i diritti dei cittadini e la loro sicurezza, proponiamo al Parlamento europeo e al Consiglio il quadro giuridico e regolamentare appropriato e, dopo che i legislatori lo hanno adottato, ne assicura l'applicazione.

Vorrei citare tre esempi: i diritti dei passeggeri, il trasporto sostenibile, la sicurezza dei passeggeri. Lei mi ha inoltre chiesto, nell'interrogazione, di essere più specifico su come questi sforzi contribuiranno ad istituire un sistema di trasporto affidabile via nave, aereo ed elicottero per le piccole regioni insulari dell'Unione europea. La sfida fondamentale a questo proposito è il finanziamento. E ritorniamo all'argomento che abbiamo affrontato nell'interrogazione precedente.

Dobbiamo essere chiari, onorevoli colleghi, su questo punto – colleghi, perché ricordo sempre di essere stato per tanti anni parlamentare – spetta agli Stati membri e alle autorità regionali decidere sulla quantità e la qualità dei collegamenti nelle piccole regioni insulari e fra queste regioni e il continente. Il nostro ruolo, quello della Commissione, è sussidiario e consiste in due compiti fra loro molto diversi. Da un lato, la Commissione attua la politica europea di coesione, che sostiene lo sviluppo delle zone con svantaggi geografici e naturali. Nell'ambito della politica di coesione, la Comunità può fornire un cofinanziamento per migliorare l'accessibilità delle regioni insulari. Dall'altro lato, la Commissione ha il dovere di assicurare che il sostegno finanziario accordato ai fornitori di servizi di trasporto non falsi la concorrenza sul mercato interno in misura contraria all'interesse comune.

Questo controllo è garantito dalla legislazione comunitaria riguardante il mercato interno dei trasporti. Gli aiuti di Stato a favore di servizi di trasporto di qualità verso e all'interno delle regioni insulari possono essere autorizzati dalla Commissione, in particolare sotto forma di corrispettivo per un onere di servizio pubblico. La legislazione che disciplina il mercato interno nel settore del trasporto marittimo ed aereo lascia agli Stati membri ampie possibilità di scelta su come organizzare i servizi di trasporto pubblico che collegano le isole al continente e le isole fra di loro, a condizione che tutti potenziali fornitori di servizi e di trasporto abbiano le stesse opportunità di fornire il servizio pubblico in questione.

  Costas Botopoulos, Autore supplente.– Caro commissario Tajani, siccome lei ha parlato italiano ho la tentazione di farlo anch'io, ma mi trattengo e parlerò in greco.

Κύριε Επίτροπε, η ερώτησή μου δεν αφορούσε τόσο πολύ το θέμα της χρηματοδότησης, το οποίο άλλωστε κάλυψε και ο συνάδελφος κύριος Μαυρομμάτης, αλλά τρία συγκεκριμένα σημεία στα οποία αναφερθήκατε τα οποία όμως θα ήθελα να σχολιάσω ειδικότερα. Το πρώτο είναι η ποιότητα των μεταφορών που είναι πολύ σημαντικό ζήτημα. Το δεύτερο είναι η ειδική περίπτωση στην οποία εντάσσονται τα μικρά νησιά και ασφαλώς γνωρίζετε ότι η χώρα μου έχει μια πλειάδα από πολύ μικρά νησιά τα οποία βρίσκονται σε ειδική κατάσταση.Και το τρίτο σημείο είναι η ειδική ψυχολογία των κατοίκων αυτών των μικρών νησιών οι οποίοι αισθάνονται λίγο αποκομμένοι,στην προκειμένη περίπτωσηαπό την υπόλοιπη Ελλάδα αλλά, γενικότερα, και από την Ευρώπη, και αυτό όταν δεν δίνουμε ιδιαίτερη σημασία στα προβλήματά τους, ιδίως σε ό,τι αφορά τις μεταφορές.Άρα, θέτω ένα πολιτικό ερώτημα που πηγαίνει πέρα από τη χρηματοδότηση: θεωρείτε ότι η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση καλείται να διαδραματίσει εδώ και έναν πολιτικό ρόλο;

  Antonio Tajani, Vicepresidente della Commissione.−La ringrazio onorevole, intanto per avere risposto nella mia lingua materna. Sarei tentato anch'io di risponderle in greco antico, avendo studiato per tanti anni il greco antico ed essendo stata mia madre per tanti anni professoressa di greco antico. Ma forse commetterei qualche errore e rischierei di non essere ben capito da lei. Grazie comunque per questo riconoscimento.

Onorevole, io l'ho detto, sia quando ero parlamentare, essendo stato eletto in un collegio che aveva anche molte isole piccole, quindi conosco bene i problemi che pongono le piccole isole, che sono magari lontane dalla terra ferma e che, soprattutto durante la stagione invernale, hanno seri problemi di collegamento, perché durante la stagione estiva ci sono navi che trasportano i turisti e quindi anche i cittadini che abitano in quelle isole, che sono spesso meta di visitatori durante l'estate, non hanno problemi durante quei due o tre mesi (giugno, luglio e agosto). I problemi iniziano a settembre e lì rischiano veramente di sentirsi isolati.

Io credo che la Commissione europea, non potendo decidere direttamente sulla vicenda – l'ho accennato nel mio intervento, siamo sempre rispettosi del principio di sussidiarietà –può svolgere un'azione di sostegno anche cofinanziando, senza distorcere il mercato interno, alcuni sistemi di trasporto che permettono a questi cittadini, che sempre cittadini dell'Unione europea sono e che hanno gli stessi diritti a spostarsi come i cittadini che abitano nelle grandi città o nella terra ferma, appunto di avere la possibilità di spostarsi e di essere raggiunti, perché il problema riguarda anche il rifornimento di alimenti, il rifornimento di acqua per alcune isole.

Onorevole, io condivido la sua preoccupazione e la sostengo. La Commissione europea, puntando sull'obiettivo di tutelare sempre e comunque i diritti dei cittadini, intende sostenere, per quanto possibile e per quanto previsto dalla normativa vigente, senza chiudere mai gli occhi, sostenere e cercare di dare risposte concrete alle esigenze dei cittadini che vivono nelle isole più piccole e che,soprattutto durante la stagione invernale, vivono oggettivamente in condizioni di disagio.

Rimango a sua disposizione e a disposizione di tutti i parlamentari greci – ma non soltanto – per tutte le iniziative che vorranno adottare per dare risposte concrete ai cittadini delle isole minori.

  Avril Doyle (PPE-DE).- Could you elaborate further on the content of the appropriate regulatory framework which you indicated was in the pipeline, particularly in relation to economic sustainability of access transport to small island regions?

Can I get assurances from you, Commissioner, that the present public service obligation regime will not be impacted in any way by this future regulatory framework that you have in mind? That is essential for the economic sustainability of these peripheral regions.

  Antonio Tajani, Vicepresidente della Commissione.− Grazie onorevole per aver posto la questione. Io credo di averlo accennato nel corso dell'intervento principale, con quale rispondevo all'interrogazione. La nostra intenzione è quella di evitare che ci sia distorsione della concorrenza e che comunque ogni tipo di intervento serva soltanto a dare risposte alle esigenze dei cittadini, senza turbare il mercato interno e senza violare la concorrenza ma soltanto, ripeto, con l'obiettivo di permettere a cittadini che vivono in zone – soprattutto, ripeto, durante la stagione invernale – disagiateed avere quindi la possibilità di essere cittadini come tutti gli altri. Quindi senza danneggiare chicchessia ma soltanto con un aiuto mirato, per permettere che questi cittadini vivano nelle condizioni nelle quali vivono tutti gli altri cittadini dell'Unione europea.

Posso quindi, per quanto riguarda le sue preoccupazione, tranquillizzarla perché il nostro obiettivo è quello di aiutare questi cittadini senza distorcere né il mercato né la concorrenza.

  President. − Question No 52 by Marie Panayotopoulos-Cassiotou (H-0715/08)

Subject: European legislative measures on shipping safety

Has the Commission assessed the implications for European shipping in the event of the entry into force of European legislative measures on shipping safety which will overlap with hitherto uniform international rules?

Why does the Commission not consider it sufficient for the Member States to ratify the IMO's international conventions so that matters over which they have sole competence and matters over which they have joint competence with the European Community are regulated only by international legislation, which the Member States establish by sole competence on the basis of their sovereign rights?

In seeking to establish sole Community competence and acquire new powers at a time when European citizens are particularly sensitive about the sovereign rights of their own country, especially in a sector under great economic strain, such as shipping, is the Commission not at risk of doing more harm than good overall?

  Antonio Tajani, Vicepresidente della Commissione.−Signor Presidente, l'onorevole Mavrommatis è sempre molto attivo e sempre coinvolto nelle questioni che riguardano il trasporto. Le proposte della Commissione sono sempre accompagnate da una valutazione d'impatto. Questo vale in particolare per le proposte del novembre 2005 relative al terzo pacchetto sulla sicurezza marittima.

Le proposte della Commissione in questo settore prendono in particolare considerazione le convenzioni internazionali pertinenti. Nella maggior parte dei casi, le proposte di legislazione mirano ad invitare gli Stati membri a ratificare le convenzioni o ad applicarle nella Comunità. Questo non avviene mai per cercare di acquisire nuove competenze. Vorrei chiarire un malinteso che è diffuso:la Comunità dispone già delle competenze necessarie per la sicurezza marittima nell'ambito della politica comune dei trasporti. E' inevitabile però che, quando il Parlamento europeo e il Consiglio legiferano, le capacità degli Stati membri di agire isolatamente a livello internazionale siano di conseguenza limitate.

Questo, però, non va a svantaggio degli Stati membri, anzi può rafforzare la nostra influenza collettiva all'interno della comunità internazionale, aumentando così il livello di protezione della vita dei cittadini e dell'ambiente. A volte l'Europa deve semplicemente prendere l'iniziativa. Questo è successo, per esempio, quando abbiamo introdotto il ritiro accelerato delle petroliere a scafo singolo per poi essere seguita questa decisione da una decisione analoga dell'Organizzazione marittima internazionale.

Lei sa bene, onorevole Mavrommatis, quali sono i problemi con l'Organizzazione marittima internazionale: non possiamo sempre essere soli a decidere. Ci sono delle competenze che non riguardano l'Europa, quindi è sempre necessario un continuo raffronto con questa organizzazione, anche perché i nostri mari sono frequentati da navi che battono bandiera di paesi che non fanno parte della nostra Unione.

Con la proposta di una nuova legislazione sulla sicurezza marittima, la Commissione intende però riequilibrare la dimensione globale del trasporto marittimo, che richiede soluzioni globali tenendo anche conto delle limitazioni del quadro giuridico globale.

Onorevole Mavrommatis, l'azione comunitaria è un'espressione concreta dello sforzo e dell'impegno collettivo degli Stati membri, non un'imposizione che viene dall'esterno e contraria ai loro interessi. Grazie ai nostri e ai vostri sforzi, la presenza di navi non conformi alle norme vigenti è fortemente diminuita nelle acque europee. La Commissione continuerà a seguire una politica equilibrata ma proattiva, perseguendo come obiettivo principale la protezione della vita e dei mezzi di sussistenza dei nostri cittadini.

  Manolis Mavrommatis, Autore supplente.– Egregio Commissario, lei sa come mi lusinghiparlare e discutere con lei. Inoltre, lei mi risponde sempre. Grazie naturalmente per le cose che interessano tutti i paesi dell'Unione europea.

Σε μια περίοδο που ευρωπαίοι πολίτες είναι ιδιαίτερα ευαίσθητοι στα κυριαρχικά δικαιώματα του κράτους τους, και σ’ έναν τόσο μεγάλο τομέα οικονομικής εντάσεως, όπως είναι ο τομέας της ναυτιλίας, η επιδιωκόμενη θεμελίωση αποκλειστικής κοινοτικής αρμοδιότητας και οι νέες εξουσίες της Επιτροπής, κατά τη γνώμη σας, δεν θα ζημιώσουν το σύνολο;

  Antonio Tajani, Vicepresidente della Commissione.− Onorevole Mavrommatis, non credo che rischi di danneggiare ma l'obiettivo è quello di cercare di armonizzare, in un contesto, quello del diritto marittimo che è sempre complicato, perché purtroppo ci troviamo sempre a confrontarci con le decisioni dell'OMI e, come le ho detto, per fortuna l'Europa a volte è protagonista e l'organizzazione internazionale ci segue.

La nostra intenzione, ripeto, non è quella di limitare i diritti degli Stati ma soltanto cercare di avere un'armonizzazione che possa servire soltanto a dare risposte più rapide e più forti ai cittadini dell'Unione europea.

  Colm Burke (PPE-DE).- I was wondering if the Commissioner is satisfied that enough action is being taken by Member States in relation to implementing existing legislation and regulation. I had my own experience in acting in a legal capacity where a very serious accident occurred, and, even 12 months after the accident, the shipping company still had not complied with the regulations that were then in place and had been in place for over three years.

  Antonio Tajani, Vicepresidente della Commissione.−Onorevole grazie per questa domanda perché mi permette anche di ricordare il risultato molto positivo che abbiamo ottenuto in occasione del Consiglio "Trasporti" di due settimane fa a Lussemburgo, quando finalmente il Consiglio ha dato il via libera all'approvazione del terzo pacchetto marittimo. Questo risultato si è avuto anche perché il Parlamento europeo ha insistito, si è impegnato, ha fatto ascoltare forte la sua voce insieme a quella della Commissione, affinché ci fosse una regolamentazione più completa a garanzia della sicurezza dei cittadini, intesa in tutti i sensi, anche dei nostri mari, tutela dell'ambiente, con anche delle responsabilità in caso di incidente.

Quando queste norme entreranno in vigore certamente sarà rinforzato il controllo comunitario. Le posso assicurare che, per quanto riguarda l'impegno della Commissione, continueremo a vigilare in maniera seria e attenta anche attraverso l'azione della nostra agenzia di Lisbona, affinché sia sempre rispettata tutta la normativa comunitaria e, soprattutto,affinché i nostri mari possano essere sempre più sicuri, con un'azione congiunta sia di tipo giuridico sia di tipo operativo, in tutti i mari che sono di competenza dell'Unione europea.

  President. − Question No 53 by Emmanouil Angelakas (H-0717/08)

Subject: Improvement of urban transport

It is a fact that urban transport is not currently the best it might be for European citizens. The stress caused by intense congestion, the high level of pollution and journeys within towns, which are responsible for 40% and more of total CO2 emissions from road transport, together with the lack of safety for drivers and vulnerable groups, such as pedestrians and cyclists, are just some of the problems encountered every day by European citizens in major towns and cities. What are the Commission's objectives and plan of action in response to this situation so that more sustainable forms of urban transport may be established and what timetable has it set for measures to achieve its objectives?

  Antonio Tajani, Vicepresidente della Commissione.−Signor Presidente, l'argomento del trasporto urbano, voglio informare gli onorevoli deputati – mi viene sempre da dire colleghi, evidentemente è l'abitudine; sono pochi mesi che faccio il Commissario e ho fatto per molti anni il parlamentare e ancora evidentemente mi sento dalla parte del Parlamento – è stato uno degli argomenti del Consiglio informale de La Rochelle del 1° e 2 settembre 2008, dove abbiamo a lungo discusso della questione del trasporto urbano.Quindi Commissione e Stati membri lo hanno affrontato con grande attenzione, anche chiamando esperti, sindaci di grandi e medie città, esperti del settore per parlare del trasporto urbano.

Ne ho parlato anch'io nel corso della Giornata sulla sicurezza stradale, che si è svolta qualche giorno fa a Parigi, in occasione della Giornata ufficiale della Commissione e del Consiglio, in occasione della settimana della sicurezza stradale, insistendo sull'opportunità che sicurezza stradale significa anche un buon sistema di trasporto urbano: le strade nostre diventeranno più sicure soprattutto nella grandi città se ci sarà un buon sistema di trasporto urbano che, a mio giudizio, è destinato a ridurre il numero delle vittime degli incidenti che accadono nelle grandi città, che sono i luoghi dove avvengono il maggiore numero di incidenti e dove c'è anche il maggior numero di vittime.

Devo dire che la Commissione sta preparando un piano d'azione sulla mobilità urbana basato sulle consultazioni che hanno seguito la pubblicazione del Libro verde. Noi intendiamo presentare il piano prima della fine di quest'anno. Questo piano comprenderà proposte per azioni concrete a livello di Unione europea per i prossimi anni.

E' chiaro che la Commissione europea non ha competenza: sono competenze che riguardano gli Stati membri ma noi, in base al principio di sussidiarietà, che come voi ben sapete deriva dalla parola subsidium, intendiamo aiutare gli Stati membri e i sindaci delle grandi città. L'ex sindaco di Milano, Gabriele Albertini, vicepresidente della commissione trasporti, può testimoniare tutto ciò: ecco noi faremo in modo che tutte le informazioni che abbiamo avuto, tutti i consigli, tutte le idee, tutti i suggerimenti possano essere portati a conoscenza attraverso questo piano d'azione di tutte le città, soprattutto le grandi città che hanno problemi di traffico.

Il piano d'azione faciliterà anche il lavoro dei policy marker a livello locale, regionale e nazionale, nel pieno rispetto – ripeto, pieno rispetto – del principio di sussidiarietà. Le azioni che noi andremo a proporre aiuteranno a ridurre i costi, assicurare il finanziamento corretto del mercato unico e a creare mercati di sbocco per le nuove tecnologie, potenziando la mobilità urbana sostenibile. Non è un caso che proprio ieri sera si sia concluso il dibattito e poi si è votato su una direttiva che deve incentivare, che punta ad incentivare, da parte degli enti locali, l'acquisto di mezzi di trasporto pubblici a ridotta emissione di gas nocivi.

Oggi, però, è ancora troppo presto per delineare, per essere precisi nei contenuti del piano d'azione, ma possiamo comunque aspettarci e potete comunque aspettarvi che tratterà la frammentazione delle regole di accesso alle zone verdi, il trasporto urbano delle merci e la logistica, la migliore informazione sui sistemi di trasporto pubblico nelle città europee oppure ampi piani sulla mobilità urbana sostenibile, proposte sulla modalità di integrazione tra pianificazione urbanistica e mobilità. Il piano d'azione potrebbe comprendere anche proposte per gli scambi di informazioni e per le migliori pratiche per la raccolta di dati e la ricerca e potrebbe affrontare anche la questione del finanziamento che è un tema assolutamente delicato. Ripeto – e insisto – basandoci sempre sul rispetto del principio di sussidiarietà.

  Εμμανουήλ Αγγελάκας (PPE-DE).- Κύριε Επίτροπε, θα περιμένουμε με πολύ ενδιαφέρον το σχέδιο δράσης που θα προτείνετε και τότε θα έχουμε την ευκαιρία να τα ξαναπούμε.

Θα ήθελα εντούτοις την προσωπική σας γνώμη στο εξής ζήτημα: πολλή συζήτηση γίνεται για τα αστικά διόδια τα οποία έχουν εφαρμοσθεί σε πόλεις όπως π.χ. το Λονδίνο, η Ρώμη, η Στοκχόλμη και φαίνεται ότι έχουν συμβάλει στη μείωση της συμφόρησης και στην αύξηση της επιβατικής κίνησης με μέσα μαζικής μεταφοράς.Σε άλλες πόλεις όμως, όπου δεν υπάρχει οργανωμένο δίκτυο,επικρατεί σκεπτικισμός και θα ήθελα στο σημείο αυτό να έχω την προσωπική σας άποψη, ως Επιτρόπου με εμπειρία, εάν και κατά πόσον τάσσεστε υπέρ των αστικών διοδίων ή όχι.

  Antonio Tajani, Vicepresidente della Commissione.−Onorevole, il problema è assolutamente delicato: se poi l'onorevole Albertini, che è sempre molto generoso, ci offrirà un caffè ne potremmo discutere ascoltando anche l'esperienza del sindaco di una grande città europea.

La questione non può avere una risposta molto facile. Io sono stato per cinque anni consigliere comunale nella città di Roma mentre ero parlamentare europeo e mi sono occupato di queste questioni. Le cose vanno esaminate città per città, realtà per realtà, perché alcune città – penso alla città di Roma – hanno un centro storico con vie molte strette, dove è difficile poter circolare. Altre città hanno realtà urbanistiche diverse e quindi non è facile avere una regola comune.

Io credo che, sempre basandoci sul principio di sussidiarietà, i sindaci debbano scegliere, con il consenso dei consigli comunali, di imporre una congestion chargese lo ritengono utile e se la città che loro amministrano ha bisogno di un traffico limitato perché facilmente si congestiona il centro di una città che è molto antico. Quindi la situazione varia da città a città ed è difficile poter dare una soluzione. Certamente io devo dire che non è una soluzione da scartarsi, anche se a volte può destare delle perplessità. Bisogna vedere qual è il perimetro. Ripeto, è una scelta che va fatta da città in città. Personalmente non sono contrario in via di principio però in certe realtà può essere ingiusto imporla e in altre può essere giustissimo.

Vista, quindi, anche la diversità delle città europee, credo che mai come in questo caso si debba lasciare alla decisione dell'amministrazione locale la scelta definitiva, fermo restando che anche nel piano d'azione noi daremo dei suggerimenti, daremo delle idee. L'importante è che siano sempre informati i cittadini e che si sappia quello che succede e le decisioni che vengono prese, perché quando si tratta di pagare una tassa è bene sempre che i cittadini sappiano per che cosa la pagano.

Mi dispiace non poterle dare una risposta definitiva di principio. Credo che veramente noi dobbiamo valutare i fatti e i risultati, in base anche all'urbanistica, caso per caso, la decisione da prendere. Ripeto, e concludo, personalmente non sono in principio contrario, però possono esserci delle realtà dove è inutile imporre una tassa del genere.

  Mairead McGuinness (PPE-DE).- Commissioner, I was struck by two words that you used:that finance is a ‘delicate’ issue; and you repeated ‘subsidiarity’, which is important.

Is the Commission concerned that the economic difficulties in Member States will impede the necessary investment in effective public transport systems?At the same time, Member States might be imposing congestion charges in large cities on hard-pressed motorists who have no choice.

  Paul Rübig (PPE-DE).- Lieber Kollege und FreundTajani! Wir freuen uns natürlich, dass wir hier die Möglichkeit haben, Fragen zu stellen, insbesondere zum öffentlichen Nahverkehr bezüglich der Ausschreibungen. Gibt es hier Vorstellungen, dass wir den öffentlichen Verkehr in den Städten ausschreiben, so wie es in Schweden in vielen Fällen gehandhabt wird, wo dann auch ein Wettbewerb um den Personennahverkehr besteht?

Zweitens:Ist eigentlich an europaweit einheitliche Leitsysteme gedacht? Wenn man in eine fremde Stadt kommt, ist es oft sehr schwer zu begreifen, wie das System dort funktioniert, und da wäre vielleicht auch ein Vorschlag der Kommission gefragt.

  Antonio Tajani, Vicepresidente della Commissione.−Signora Presidente, grazie per le domande. Io credo innanzitutto che nel piano d'azione che presenteremo, noi dovremo insistere sulla necessità di dare delle comunicazioni ai cittadini europei quando si spostano da una città all'altra, affinché sappiano cosa succede e cosa trovano quando si spostano da Stoccolma a Madrid piuttosto che da Roma a Vienna; sapere qual è la realtà, quali sono le tasse che eventualmente devono pagare, in modo che organizzino i loro viaggi, siano essi per lavoro o per turismo.Questo è già importante e credo che noi dobbiamo lavorare.

Certo, onorevoli, io insisto sulla questione del principio di sussidiarietà perché noi non possiamo intervenire come Unione europea su questioni che sono di stretta competenza delle amministrazioni locali. Anche per quanto riguarda gli aspetti finanziari, non tocca alla Commissione intervenire. È un problema quello del finanziamento. Certo, noi cercheremo di raccogliere nel piano d'azione i suggerimenti che ci sono venuti nel corso delle varie audizioni per fornire un servizio, per fornire un aiuto agli amministratori locali che saranno poi liberi di accettarli o meno. Il nostro obiettivo è quello di cercare di armonizzare il sistema quantomeno di informazioni per i cittadini e di fornire alle diverse amministrazioni locali il maggior numero possibile di informazioni che riguardano esperienze fatte in altre città, in modo che possano eventualmente farne uso. Questo è importante.

Per quanto riguarda i finanziamenti, io credo che ogni comune sia libero di fare come ritiene senza ostacolare, ovviamente, il mercato e la libera circolazione dei cittadini. Deve essere sempre tutto quanto proporzionato. Per quanto riguarda invece l'ultima domanda che mi ha posto l'onorevole Rübig, la direttiva sugli obblighi del servizio pubblico lascia ai comuni la libertà di decidere se fare gare di appalto oppure non farle. Credo che l'Unione europea, da questo punto di vista, abbia ancora una volta insistito sul principio di sussidiarietà.

Io credo che sia giusto da questo punto di vista, perché il nostro compito non deve essere un compito invasivo: non dobbiamo regolare tutto e il contrario di tutto, dobbiamo occuparci dei grandi problemi, dare grandi risposte e aiutare, semmai, gli enti locali e gli Stati membri a risolvere i problemi, dove lo possono fare, magari, con un contributo e un aiuto dell'Unione europea, senza che questo sia un contributo primario e invasivo.Credo che questo,nel trasporto pubblico locale, debba essere un principio al quale tutti quanti noi dobbiamo – e io ritengo vogliamo – attenerci.

  President. − That concludes Question Time.

Questions which have not been answered for lack of time will be answered in writing (see Annex).

(The sitting was suspended at 19.45 and resumed at 21.00)

ΠΡΟΕΔΡΙΑ: ΡΟΔΗ ΚΡΑΤΣΑ-ΤΣΑΓΚΑΡΟΠΟΥΛΟΥ
Αντιπρόεδρος

(1) OJ L 207, 5.8.2008, p. 24.

(2) OJ L 312, 30.11.2007, p. 49.