# CE2004084EN.01078101.xml

| 3.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 84/781 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 84/781

---

(2004/C 84 E/0877)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0358/04

by Werner Langen (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(6 February 2004)

Subject:   Proceedings concerning the German deposit on drinks cans

Subject:

In October 2003 the Commission opened infringement proceedings concerning the German deposit on drinks cans.

Given that the deadline for the Federal Republic of Germany to issue a response has passed, and that the regulations pose a threat not only to intra-Community trade, but also to production plants in Germany, can the Commission answer the following questions:

| 1. | What stage has been reached in the proceedings? |
| --- | --- |

1.

What stage has been reached in the proceedings?

| 2. | What arguments has the Commission put forward against the German regulation? |
| --- | --- |

2.

What arguments has the Commission put forward against the German regulation?

| 3. | Does the Commission believe it would make sense to immediately suspend the German regulation on deposits on drinks cans? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Does the Commission believe it would make sense to immediately suspend the German regulation on deposits on drinks cans?

| 4. | What measures are planned, and when will they be implemented? |
| --- | --- |

4.

What measures are planned, and when will they be implemented?

Answer by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(3 March 2004)

(3 March 2004)

| 1. | On 21 October 2003, the Commission decided to send the Federal Republic of Germany a letter of formal notice. Germany responded by letters dated 22 December 2003 and 22 January 2004. The Commission is currently studying Germany's reply. |
| --- | --- |

1.

On 21 October 2003, the Commission decided to send the Federal Republic of Germany a letter of formal notice. Germany responded by letters dated 22 December 2003 and 22 January 2004. The Commission is currently studying Germany's reply.

| 2. | In its letter of formal notice, the Commission criticised the practical implementation of the deposit and return obligation laid down in the Verpackungsverordnung (Packaging Regulation) because of the absence of comprehensive and mutually compatible return systems. If there is no functioning, nationwide arrangement for deposit clearing between return systems, it is reasonable to assume that retailers might decide to stop stocking some or all of the beverages concerned. The Commission is therefore currently examining whether and, if so, in what way the deposit and return system, in its current form, has the effect of restricting the import of beverages into Germany. As regards the problem of ‘Insellösungen’ (‘stand-alone’ or ‘individual’ solutions), these have the effect of increasing production costs and can restrict imports from other Member States, because manufacturers have to set up their own production/packaging lines for some parts of the German market. |
| --- | --- |

2.

In its letter of formal notice, the Commission criticised the practical implementation of the deposit and return obligation laid down in the Verpackungsverordnung (Packaging Regulation) because of the absence of comprehensive and mutually compatible return systems. If there is no functioning, nationwide arrangement for deposit clearing between return systems, it is reasonable to assume that retailers might decide to stop stocking some or all of the beverages concerned. The Commission is therefore currently examining whether and, if so, in what way the deposit and return system, in its current form, has the effect of restricting the import of beverages into Germany. As regards the problem of ‘Insellösungen’ (‘stand-alone’ or ‘individual’ solutions), these have the effect of increasing production costs and can restrict imports from other Member States, because manufacturers have to set up their own production/packaging lines for some parts of the German market.

| 3. | The Federal Republic of Germany must meet its obligations under Community law. To the extent that the choice of instrument lies with the individual Member State, it is up to the latter to decide which instrument is most appropriate. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The Federal Republic of Germany must meet its obligations under Community law. To the extent that the choice of instrument lies with the individual Member State, it is up to the latter to decide which instrument is most appropriate.

| 4. | The Commission will take appropriate measures pursuant to Article 226 of the EC Treaty, in the light of both its examination of Germany's reply and its ongoing assessment of market conditions. |
| --- | --- |

4.

The Commission will take appropriate measures pursuant to Article 226 of the EC Treaty, in the light of both its examination of Germany's reply and its ongoing assessment of market conditions.

---