Sie sind auf Seite 1von 2

6.2.

2003 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 28 E/133

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(26 July 2002)

Under the subsidiarity principle and in line with Structural Fund rules it is up to the Greek authorities to
select projects in line with the criteria set in the relevant operational programme adopted by the
Commission. Thus it is not the Community that approves financing of individual projects or monitors
their execution.

The project in question was selected by the Greek authorities for assistance under the Sustainable
expansion of tourism subprogramme of the Ionian Islands regional operational programme.

We have been informed by the national authorities that the marina is owned by the Greek State, which
made over operating rights to the Prefecture of Lefkada, which is the final recipient of the assistance
granted from the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF). By a contract signed at the end of 1999
the Prefecture assigned construction and operation of the marina for a 40-year period to the undertaking
Lefkada Marína SA.

Project execution is in two stages, the first involving work on the boat harbour itself costing
EUR 8 800 000 in total, 75 % part-financed from the ERDF (1994-1999 programming period). The second
covers completion of the harbour work plus work on landside facilities, the total cost being
EUR 19 800 000: EUR 6 200 000 of public and EUR 13 600 000 of private expenditure. The ERDF is
paying 75 % of the public expenditure under the Ionian Islands regional operational programme of the
2000-2006 Community support framework.

(2003/C 28 E/154) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1760/02


by Christos Folias (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(19 June 2002)

Subject: Cattle import licences

The prospect of a change in the method of allocating licences for breeding calves for fattening has caused
intense speculation and great concern among Greek stock farmers.

Is there any such prospect and, if so, how does the Commission intend to safeguard the future of small
importers who have invested in recent years in modernising their operations but will be unable to compete
as the financial conditions intended to apply to imported cattle will favour only large-scale stock farmers in
Europe?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(26 July 2002)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1126/2002 of 27 June 2002 opening and providing for the adminis-
tration of an import tariff quota for young male bovine animals for fattening (1 July 2002 to 30 June
2003) (1) has established the detailed rules for the quota year 2002/2003 with regard to the World Trade
Organisation (WTO) import quota of live male animals for fattening.

The basic method of allocation of import rights has not been modified compared with the corresponding
Regulation of 2001 (2). This means that the Greek importers still have a guaranteed access to a specific part
of the quota with unchanged criteria of participation. However, the specific part reserved for Greek
importers was slightly reduced from 11,5 % (=19 500 animals) to 10,7 % (=18 100 animals) in line with
recent developments of import needs.
C 28 E/134 Official Journal of the European Union EN 6.2.2003

The Regulation has introduced reinforced provisions on the actual use of import certificates. The main
objective is to avoid speculation and trade in licences which, if achieved, would benefit all genuine
importers irrespective of their trading volumes.

(1) OJ L 169, 28.6.2002.


(2) OJ L 150, 6.6.2001.

(2003/C 28 E/155) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1767/02


by Mario Borghezio (NI) to the Commission

(21 June 2002)

Subject: Extension of the fingerprinting of non-Community nationals

 Article 8 of Regulation (EC) 2725/2000 (1) (’Eurodac’), which has been in force for about two years,
requires the taking of ‘the fingerprints of all fingers of every alien of at least 14 years of age who is
apprehended by the competent control authorities in connection with the irregular crossing by land,
sea or air of the border’. These rules are to be applied to all asylum seekers and illegal immigrants.

 However, the fight against rising immigration-related crime and, above all, anti-terrorist intelligence
activities mean that is necessary for the competent police and judicial authorities to be able to identify
with certainty the majority of immigrants.

 Some EU countries have already adopted (Belgium) or are in the process of adopting (Italy) measures
for the routine fingerprinting of foreigners from outside the Community.

Does the Commission not consider that, in connection with the work of the forthcoming European
summit in Seville, such procedures should be generalised at European level in the interests of security,
control of illegal immigration and preventing and combating terrorism?

(1) OJ L 316, 15.12.2000, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(17 July 2002)

The purpose of Eurodac is to facilitate the effective application of the Dublin Convention (1) and the
proposed Dublin II Regulation (2).

The Eurodac Central Unit collects and/or compares the fingerprints of asylum applicants and certain other
categories of third country nationals submitted by the Member States. On the one hand, these other
categories refer to foreigners who were apprehended in connection with the irregular crossing of the
border of a Member State, having come from a third country and who were not turned back, and, on the
other hand, to foreigners found illegally present in a Member State.

In all cases, the fingerprints are taken and submitted for the sole purpose of helping the Member States
determine which one is competent for examining an asylum application according to the Dublin
Convention. At the initiative of one Member State, the possibility of using Eurodac data for police
purposes, as an additional measure to combat terrorism, has been addressed in the Council but without
conclusions so far.

The Commission does not envisage any proposal for taking and recording fingerprints of persons not
falling under the categories as mentioned above.

(1) Convention determining the State responsible for examining applications for asylum lodged in one of the Member
States  OJ C 254, 19.8.1997.
(2) Proposal for a Council Regulation establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State
responsible for examining an asylum application lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national,
OJ C 304 E, 30.10.2001.