publicSpanishshipyards.ItcanfurthermorebenotedthattherelevantCommissiondecisionwaspartly
basedonCouncilRegulation(2)1013/97of2June1997onaidtocertainshipyardsunderrestructuring,
which also stated the condition on the non-reopening to shipbuilding at Astano. However, theCommissionhasnotreceivedanyformalrequestfromtheSpanishgovernmentconcerningtheFeneyardandhasnottakenanypositiononthisissue.
(1) OJC354,21.11.1997,p.2.
(2) OJL148,6.6.1997,p.1.
(2004/C58E/072) WRITTENQUESTIONE-1260/03
byCamiloNogueiraRomán(Verts/ALE)totheCommission
(3April2003)
Subject:PresenceofGalicianvesselsinthedevelopmentofthefishingindustryinBrazil
IstheCommissionawareoftheexperiencesoffishingvesselsfromGalicianportssuchasVigo,LaCoruña,
RibeiraandMarínwhichareworkingorhaveworkedinwatersunderexclusiveBraziliancompetence,hiring licences from Brazilian companies? Will the Commission take advantage of the desire forcooperation shown by the new Brazilian government and take steps which might lead to mutuallybeneficialagreements?
AnswergivenbyMrFischleronbehalfoftheCommission
(16May2003)
At present there is no fisheries agreement between the Community and Brazil. Thus any fishing in
Brazilian waters by vessels flying the flag of a Member State is not covered by such an agreement.TheCommissiondoesnotruleoutthepossibilitythatunderprivatecontractsCommunityvesselshavebeenallowedtofishinthesewaters.
TheCommissionhasmaintainedcontactinthepastwithBrazilinordertoexplorethepossibilityof
reachingmutuallyadvantageousagreementsinthefisheriessector.Thesehavehowevernevergivenrisetoformalnegotiations.
TheCommissionisreadytoconsultregularlywithBrazilonquestionsofmutualinterestinthesector.Ifa
desireforcooperationarrangementswastobeconfirmeditwouldbereadytodiscussdirectlywhatthecontentoftheseshouldbe.
(2004/C58E/073) WRITTENQUESTIONE-1268/03
byAntonioDiPietro(ELDR)totheCommission
(3April2003)
Subject:RulesgoverninglocalradiobroadcastersinItaly
Article1(2)(a)ofLawNo66of20March2001requiresthatcommerciallocalradiobroadcastersinItaly
have the legal status of partnerships or joint stock companies that employ at least two people inconformitywiththesocialsecurityprovisionsinforce.C58E/54 EN6.3.2004 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion
DoestheCommissionnotconsiderthatthisruleforceslocalradiobroadcasterstobearconsiderablefixed
costs(inadditiontothelicencefeealreadyimposed)tothedetrimentoffreecompetition,andthatthisopenlyconflictswithDirective97/13/EC(
1)andtheannextothatdirective,recital25ofwhichindicates
its essential goal as being that of ‘ensuring the development of the internal market in the field oftelecommunications and specifically the free provision of telecommunications services and networksthroughouttheCommunity’?
Moreprecisely,recital2ofthedirective statestheintentionto‘ensurethatgeneralauthorisationand
individuallicensingregimesarebasedontheprincipleofproportionalityandareopen,non-discriminatoryandtransparent’.Recital3statesthat‘marketentryshouldberestrictedonthebasisonlyofobjective,non-
discriminatory, proportionate and transparent selection criteria relating to the availability of scarce
resources or onthe basisofthe implementationby nationalregulatory authorities ofobjective, non-discriminatory and transparent award procedures’. Recital 4 indicates that ‘general authorisation andindividuallicensingsystemsshouldprovideforthelightestpossibleregulation’and,lastly,recital10statesthat‘anyconditionsattachedtoauthorisationsshouldbeobjectivelyjustifiedinrelationtotheserviceconcernedandshouldbenon-discriminatory,proportionateandtransparent’.
(1) OJL117,7.5.1997,p.15.
AnswergivenbyMrLiikanenonbehalfoftheCommission
(22May2003)
ThequestionsoftheHonourableMemberconcerntheobligationestablishedbytheLawof20March
2001,No66whichmakesthecontinuationoftheactivityofalocalradiobroadcastersubjecttocertainrequirementsastoitslegalstatus.Inhisview,firstlythislawwouldforcethelocalbroadcasterstobearconsiderablefixedcoststothedetrimentoffreecompetition.Secondly,thelawwouldbeinbreachofDirective97/13/ECoftheParliamentandoftheCouncilof10April1997onacommonframeworkforgeneralauthorizationsandindividuallicencesinthefieldoftelecommunicationsservices(hereafter,theLicensingDirective),sinceitwouldrequireaffectedoperatorstoincursignificantadditionalcosts,whichwouldhinderthedevelopmentofcompetition.
Whiletherelevantrequirementsmaymeanaburdenfortherelevantoperators,thereareneverthelessno
indicationsthattheylimitfreecompetition.Moreover,therequirementsapplyinthesamewaytoalloperatorsandcouldbejustifiedbytheneedtoensureaminimalcontinuityandprofessionalityoftheservicesofthebroadcastersallowedtousescarceradiospectrum.Insuchcase,therelevantobligationcouldbeconsideredproportionate.
As regards the compliance with the Licensing Directive, the issue raised does not seem, in the
Commission’sopinion,tofallwithinitsscopeofapplication.AsstatedinitsArticle2(2),Directive97/13/EC uses the same definitions as Directive 90/387/EEC(
1) as amended(2), which applies to tele-
communicationsserviceswiththeexceptionofradioandtelevisionbroadcasting.Inaddition,Article1(2)oftheLicensingDirectivestatesthat‘thisDirectiveiswithoutprejudicetothespecificrulesadoptedbytheMemberStatesinaccordancewithCommunitylaw,governingthedistributionofaudiovisualprogrammesintendedforthegeneralpublicandforthecontentofsuchprogrammes’.
Witheffectfrom25July2003,theLicensingDirectivewillberepealedbyDirective2002/20/ECofthe
ParliamentanoftheCouncilontheauthorisationofelectroniccommunicationsnetworksandservices
(hereafter, the Authorisation Directive)(
3). As in the case of the old framework, the new regulatory
framework,includingtheAuthorisationDirective,doesnotcoverthecontentofservicesdeliveredoverelectronic communications networks using electronic communication services, such as broadcastingcontent.
However,theAuthorisationDirectiveappliestoauthorisationfortheprovisionofelectroniccommuni-
cationsnetworksandservices,whichincludesnetworksusedforradiobroadcasting,inaccordancewiththedefinitioninArticle2(a)ofDirective2002/21/ECoftheParliamentandoftheCouncilonacommon6.3.2004EN C58E/55 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion
frameworkforelectroniccommunicationsnetworksandservices(FrameworkDirective)(3).Thedeadline
fortranspositionoftheAuthorisationDirectiveis24July2003.Italyiscurrentlydraftingtherelevantlegislation.TheCommissionwillnaturallyassessthecomplianceoftherelevantnationallegislationwiththenewCommunityregulatoryframeworkforelectroniccommunicationsnetworksandservicesoncethishasbeennotified.
(1) CouncilDirective90/387/EECof28June1990ontheestablishmentoftheinternalmarketfortelecommunications
servicesthroughtheimplementationofopennetworkprovision,OJL192,24.7.1990.
(2) Directive97/51/ECoftheParliamentandoftheCouncilof6October1997amendingCouncilDirectives90/387/
EECand92/44/EECforthepurposeofadaptationtoacompetitiveenvironmentintelecommunications,OJL295,
29.10.1997.
(3) OJL108,24.4.2002.
(2004/C58E/074) WRITTENQUESTIONE-1301/03
byEmiliaMüller(PPE-DE)totheCommission
(7April2003)
Subject:SupportforaquacultureunderRegulation(EC)No1257/1999
In its communication COM(2002)511 /dash A strategy for the sustainable development of European
aquaculture/dashtheCommissionpointsoutthatcertainenvironmentalaspectsofpondsorotherwaterbodiesinuseforaquacultureareeligibleforEUsupportunderRegulation(EC)No1257/1999(
1)(p.20).
Point4.8providesalistofenvironmentalaspectseligibleforsupportwhichincludes,interalia,actionto‘recogniseandstrengthenthepositiveimpactofextensivecultureandre-stocking’.
1. Cansupportbeprovidedunderthisschemeforextensivelyfarmedpondsevenwheretheyarenot
economicallyviable?
2. WhatprecisemeasuresdoestheCommissionconsidermustbetakenforsuchaquaculturetobe
eligibleforsupport?
3. Whatmaximumrateswouldbesetforsuchsupport?4. Whattypeoffundingwouldbeinvolved?
(1) OJL160,26.6.1999,p.80.
AnswergivenbyMrFischleronbehalfoftheCommission
(3June2003)
WhilesupportfortheaquaculturesectorperseisnoteligibleforsupportunderCouncilRegulation(EC)
No 1257/1999 of 17May 1999 on support for rural development from the European AgriculturalGuidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF), the Honourable Member correctly indicates that certainenvironmentalaspectsofpondsorotherwaterbodiesinuseforaquaculturecanbesupported.Such
supportfallsinparticular within Chapter VIofthisRegulation (agri-environment). The provisionson
environmentalobjectivesandsupportfixedinthisChaptercanequallyapplytopondswhichmightbeusedforaquaculture,providedthebeneficiaryisafarmer.
WithregardtotheindividualquestionsoftheHonourableMember,thefollowingcanbestated:
1. For agri-environment the economic viability is not an eligibility criterion. General criterion for
grantingaidundertheabove-mentionedChapterVIisbenefitsfortheenvironment.Ifthesebenefitsaredemonstrated,theeffortsofapotentialbeneficiarytoachievethemresultinginincomeforegoneandcostincurredcanbecompensated;wherenecessary,anincentiveupto20%oftheselossescanbepaid.C58E/56 EN6.3.2004 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion