Sie sind auf Seite 1von 1

C 151 E/210 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 22.5.

2001

(2001/C 151 E/248) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3983/00


by Christine De Veyrac (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(20 December 2000)

Subject: Community subsidies for the Midi-Pyrénées Region: amounts and allocation

What are the figures for Community subsidies, distinguishing where necessary between commitment
appropriations and payment appropriations, for Toulouse and the Midi-Pyrénées Region in 1997, 1998,
1999 and 2000, and who were the beneficiaries, under the heading of:

 the ERDF

 the EAGGF-Guidance

 the ESF

 research programmes

 environment programmes

 SME programmes

 education, training and youth programmes

 decentralised cooperation?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(11 January 2001)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its
findings as soon as possible.

(2001/C 151 E/249) WRITTEN QUESTION P-4106/00


by Pietro-Paolo Mennea (ELDR) to the Commission

(20 December 2000)

Subject: State of affairs of farming in Apulia

In demonstrations lasting several days during the first half of November, in the city of Barletta and in
villages in the Ofanto valley, farmers from Barletta mounted a strong protest against the steep increase in
fuel prices, the extremely high fines imposed for planting vines which are held to be illegal, and the 35 %
cut in aid for olive oil.

The city and residents of Barletta suffered serious damage when the town hall was occupied, the main
internal roads in the city itself were blocked and a tilting train was forcibly held at the city railway station;
as a result of these protests three city guards who had intervened to curb the demonstration were
wounded.

Therefore, will the Commission say whether farmers within Objective 1 regions may benefit from:

 the abolition of fines imposed for vines which are held to be illegal or, alternatively, the imposition of
a token fine, as is already the case in Spain;

 non-implementation of the revised 35 % cut in aid to olive oil, or, if the revised cut is confirmed, a
reduction below 35 %;

 a reduction in the cost of fuel used for agricultural purposes.