----

(2004/C 88 E/0434)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2674/03

by María Rodríguez Ramos (PSE) to the Commission

(10 September 2003)

Subject:   Application of the safeguard clause in respect of EU imports of tinned satsuma segments from China

In its recent reply to my Question E-1646/03 (1), the Commission recognised the urgent nature of the request that the safeguard clause be applied to tinned satsuma segments from China, and stated that it was ‘currently’ [actualmente] in receipt of a request from the Spanish Government, complete with all requisite documentation.

Given that Spain requested the application of the clause at the beginning of June 2002, and that, in November 2002, the Commission's reply to my Question P-2956/02 (2) justified its inactivity by the fact that the file submitted by the Spanish authorities was not rigorous enough, it appears to me that the sector affected has a right to know the real reasons for the delay of over a year in dealing with this request.

In July 2003, the Commission used the term ‘currently’ [actualmente]. Will the Commission state on what exact date the Spanish authorities forwarded adequate information as to the nature and scale of the disruption being caused to sales, and the seriousness of the impact this is having on the Community producers affected, as demanded by WTO rules?

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(23 October 2003)

As explained in its joint reply to the Honourable Member's written questions E-1646/03, E-1920/03 and 1921/03 (3), the Commission received a fully documented formal request for safeguard measures under the transitional product specific safeguard mechanism (TPSSM) (4), and this was received on 10 June 2003. Spain re-submitted the request under the general erga omnes safeguard regulations, and this was received on 20 June 2003 (5).

Having analysed the requests and consulted with the Member States, investigations under both the general erga omnes safeguard instrument and under the TPSSM were opened on 11 July 2003 (6). Those investigations were pursued throughout the summer and are still ongoing. Member States are being kept closely informed of developments.

With regard to the fact that it took more than a year since Spain's initial contact to propose the initiation of an investigation, the Commission would like to inform the Honourable Member that this time was necessary to clarify a number of legal and substantive issues surrounding the case and to make sure that the Spanish requests meet the very high standards required by World Trade Organisation (WTO) and Community rules. As the Honourable Member may well understand, gathering up and assessing the relevant information as well as holding a series of consultations with all the parties concerned are time consuming steps, but -in any case- absolutely essential to establish the nature and reach of the alleged prejudice.

The Commission would like to note that this is the first investigation carried out under the TPSSM Regulation.

----

(1)  See page 363.

(2)OJ C 161 E, 10.7.2003, p. 55.

(3)  See page 363.

(4)  Council Regulation (EC) No 427/2003 of 3 March 2003 on a transitional product-specific safeguard mechanism for imports originating in the People's Republic of China and amending Regulation (EC) No 519/94 on common rules for imports from certain third countries, OJ L 65, 8.3.2003.

(5)  Council Regulation (EC) No 3285/1994 of 22 December 1994 on common rules for imports, OJ L 349, 31.12.1994, and Council Regulation (EC) No 519/1994 of 7 March 1994 on common rules for imports from certain third countries, OJ L 67, 10.3.1994.

(6)OJ C 162, 11.7.2003.

----