C 58 E/82 Official Journal of the European Union EN 6.3.2004 The planned reform will allow the Member States to subdivide their base area using objective criteria. In that case, it will be up to them to decide whether to subdivide their base area so that the impact of any reductions can differentiated by region of production. In any case, agri-environmental aid may be granted over and above specific aid for rural development in accordance with Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 on support for rural development from the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) and amending and repealing certain Regulations (1). (1) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999. (2004/C 58 E/099) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1633/03 by Mario Borghezio (NI) to the Commission (15 May 2003) Subject: Commemoration of Saint Mark of Aviano, symbol of European identity Pope John Paul II has canonised the Capuchin priest Mark of Aviano, emphasising his prophetic mission as a man of peace, and holding him up as a symbol of a common European cultural identity. Can the Commission state what initiatives the EU intends to undertake, at a time when a Constitution affirming Europe’s Christian cultural and spiritual roots is being prepared, to celebrate (together with Saint Benedict, Patron Saint of Europe) Mark of Aviano, a great European, defender of Vienna and an extraordinary man of peace? Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission (16 June 2003) The notable merits of Marco d’Aviano unfortunately do not alter the fact that the Commission must confine its work to its areas of competence, so no specific action to commemorate the life and testimony of this Saint will be launched on the Commission’s own initiative. As a matter of record, Honourable Members have drawn the attention of the Commission to the merits of individual Saints before, and the Commission’s response has been the same. The Commission could draw the Honourable Member’s attention for example to the reply given to question E-0559/93 by Mr Fernandez-Albor (1). (1) OJ C 320, 26.11.1993. (2004/C 58 E/100) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1638/03 by Bernard Poignant (PSE) to the Commission (16 May 2003) Subject: Combating marine pollution caused by the sinking of the ‘Prestige’ Southern Brittany is now having to deal with the problem of pellets of fuel oil from the ‘Prestige’, which sank off the Galician coast over six months ago, being washed up along its shores. The hulk is still leaking oil, and we now have proof that the decision to tow the ‘Prestige’ away from the Spanish coast helped ensure more extensive and widespread pollution of the European coastline. 6.3.2004 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 58 E/83 The risk of pollution will remain unless and until the oil lying at the bottom of the sea in the vessel is removed. The techniques used to pump up oil from the Erika cannot be used on this occasion, as the ‘Prestige’ is lying at too great a depth. The attempts made by Ifremer to seal up the wreck by robot have not proved sufficiently effective and at present about a tonne of oil is leaking per day. At that rate, it could take months or even years for the risk to disappear. Along the European coastline, two activities have been particularly badly affected by this disaster: fishing and aquaculture, which are directly affected by the pollution, and the tourist industry, for which clean beaches are a priority. Everyone is asking the same question: When will this pollution stop? Does the Commission at last have any plans to issue a call for an international project to neutralise the oil pollution caused by the ‘Prestige’? If so, when will it do so? Does the Commission have any plans to set up a ‘Eurocorps’ for civil emergencies to allow the rapid deployment of qualified human resources and appropriate technical means to clean up affected areas? Does the Commission have any plans to consider the construction of anti-pollution vessels designed to track down pollution at sea, rather than waiting for it to wash up on our shores? Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission (13 June 2003) The Commission fully shares the concern expressed by the Honourable Member about the problem caused by the oil in the wreck of the ‘Prestige’, which represents a threat for the marine and coastal environment of Spain and France. Concerning the neutralisation of the pollution of the ‘Prestige’, the Honourable Member of Parliament is invited to refer to the previous oral question H-069/03 by Mr Nogueira Roman during question time at Parliament’s March 2003 session (1) and Written Questions E-3595/02 (2) and E-1259/03 (3) both by Mr Nogueira Roman. The Commission reminds the Honourable Member that a report on actions dealing with the effects of the ‘Prestige’ disaster was adopted on 5 March 2003. This report, submitted to the European Council of 21 March 2003, examines past, present and future actions undertaken at Community level to remedy the consequences of the ‘Prestige’ disaster and to prevent similar accidents from occurring in the future. Concerning the setting-up of a Civil Protection Eurocorps or an Euro Coast Guard, the Honourable Member is invited to refer to previous oral question H-197/03 by Mr Dhaene during question time at Parliament’s April 2003 session (4). Civil Protection measures fall under the competence of the Member States and are governed by the principle of subsidiarity. Moreover, it should be stressed that the Commission is already active in this field. At the Commission’s initiative, a Community mechanism to facilitate reinforced co-operation in the field of civil protection (5) has been set-up. This framework can provide a way for a better Civil Protection co-ordination within as well as outside the Union. One of the key elements in this context has been the setting-up, within the Commission, of the Civil Protection Response Centre. This Centre is in place since 1 January 2002 and available on a permanent basis, 24-hours a day. Once activated by a request from one of the participating countries, the Centre can immediately call upon Member State Civil Protection resources, as already pre- identified, for all types of major emergencies. The Commission considers that the Civil Protection Response Centre, which builds on all available national capacities, represents an effective tool that addresses the concerns expressed by the Honourable Member. Nevertheless, the idea of creating a Civil Protection Eurocorps is certainly interesting and the Commission will carefully follow the discussions on this issue, also in the context of the Convention. The Commission has already broached the issue of specialised vessels to combat pollution at sea, by financing a specific pilot project under the Community framework for cooperation in the field of response to marine pollution (6). The results have been sent to competent national authorities and a summary report is available on the following website: (http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/civil/marin/mp09_en_rol- lingplan.htm). C 58 E/84 Official Journal of the European Union EN 6.3.2004 Moreover, the Commission has already announced its intention to amend the Regulation creating the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) in order to enable EMSA to purchase or lease anti-pollution ships in cases of maritime pollution in the Union. (1) Written reply, 11.3.2003. (2) OJ C 242 E, 9.10.2003, p. 63. (3) OJ C 280 E, 21.11.2003, p. 121. (4) Oral reply, 8.4.2003. (5) Council Decision 2001/792/EC, Euratom of 23 October 2001 establishing a Community mechanism to facilitate reinforced cooperation in civil protection assistance interventions, OJ L 297, 15.11.2001. (6) Council Decision 2850/2000 of 20 December 2000 setting up a Community framework for cooperation in the field of accidental or deliberate marine pollution, OJ L 332, 28.12.2000. (2004/C 58 E/101) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1664/03 by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Commission (19 May 2003) Subject: Cancellation of the colloquy on multilingualism If my information is correct, the Commission agreed to finance a colloquy on multilingualism in the European institutions and in Europe, to be held on 5/6 May 2003. Apparently, the Commission suggested holding a preparatory meeting to draw up the list of topics to be discussed. The meeting was held on 27/28 January 2003 and was attended by experts from the Member States and eminent people in the cultural sphere. Despite the apparent success of the preparatory meeting, the Commission decided to cancel the scheduled colloquy. 1. Can the Commission state the reasons for the cancellation? 2. Does it not consider that by taking this decision it failed to exploit one of its institutional prerogatives, that of identifying the general interest and making proposals for safeguarding it, and also failed to meet the commitment it made to experts and representatives of civil society with whom the idea of holding the colloquy originated? 3. Does it not consider, in the interests of respecting the cultural diversity of the EU countries, that a harmonious balance should be reached between languages and populations, in order to avoid patronising and silencing these different cultures by not promoting multilingualism? 4. Does it not consider that there is a close link between a people’s language and identity and that exclusion of the former may be an attempt to abolish and proscribe the latter? 5. Does it not consider that it would be appropriate to consider once again the idea of holding the colloquy on the value of multilingualism in the near future? Answer by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission (10 July 2003) Following an initiative from various bodies interested in language policies, a Symposium on Multi- lingualism in the Enlarged Union and its Institutions was scheduled for 5/6 May 2003, in the European Parliament.