EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 88/118

(2004/C 88 E/0126)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2889/03

by Samuli Pohjamo (ELDR) and Mikko Pesälä (ELDR) to the Commission

(29 September 2003)

Subject: Need for a minimum import price for, and import duty on, Norwegian salmon and rainbow trout

In recent years, Norway's production of salmon and rainbow trout has grown in an uncontrolled manner, leading to substantial overproduction, viability problems and a wave of bankruptcies among Norwegian fish farmers. It is cheaper to dump farmed salmon in the EU at prices equivalent to half of production costs than to pay the waste disposal charges which would be levied for the destruction of the excess product in Norway. There have also been repeated instances of Norwegian salmon escaping from pens, endangering valuable natural salmon stocks in the River Teno, for example, which remains in a natural state.

The EU is currently defenceless against the flood of imports, as the minimum import price which used to apply to salmon has been abolished and a minimum price for rainbow trout is only at the planning stage.

It costs EUR 3,25 per kg to produce salmon in Norway. Recent import statistics show that the product is being sold at a significantly lower price in Finland; at the end of July 2003, salmon was being imported from Norway at a price of EUR 1,98 per kg and rainbow trout at EUR 2,70 per kg.

By the end of July 2003, 6,4 million kg of Norwegian salmon and 4,4 million kg of rainbow trout had been imported into Finland. In the case of salmon, this represented an increase of 42 % over the previous year, and in the case of rainbow trout, 144 %. In Finland, 15 million kg of rainbow trout is produced per annum. A total of 1 million kg of salmon from the Baltic and the River Teno is fished in Finland per annum.

The fact that the import price of salmon is substantially lower than its production cost is rapidly destroying rainbow trout production in Finland. At the same time, imported salmon distorts price levels for wild fish caught by Finnish fishermen and makes it harder to work as a professional fisherman.

Will the Commission take measures to reinstate the minimum import price for Norwegian salmon, introduce a minimum import price for rainbow trout which is at least equal to production costs and impose import duty on such fish in European Union territory?

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(4 November 2003)

As the question of the Honourable Members concerns two different anti-dumping/anti-subsidy proceedings, the Commission will reply separately for each proceeding.

Farmed Atlantic salmon:

— As concerns farmed Atlantic salmon originating in Norway, although the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy measures for this product were terminated in May 2003, the Commission has continued to monitor the Community market closely and is aware that the situation deteriorated following termination. However, according to the most recent official statistics available, there are indications that the Norwegian export prices of farmed Atlantic salmon to the Community have started to rise. It nevertheless remains to be seen whether this upward trend will continue.

— With regard to the issue of reinstating the minimum import prices for Norwegian salmon as suggested by the Honourable Members, it should be noted that termination of the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy measures means that there is no procedural framework in place for considering such action in the very short term. However, an ‘understanding’ between World Trade Organisation (WTO) members means that any new anti-dumping case can only be initiated one year after termination of previous measures. Such a complaint would also have to be duly substantiated and show, ‘inter alia’, that the circumstances on which the decision to terminate the measures was based have changed and that there is prima facie evidence of injurious dumping.

— In addition, it should also be recalled that the Commission can take surveillance or safeguard action within the framework of Council Regulation (EC) No 3285/94 of 22 December 1994 on the common rules for imports (1), if imports of the product in question are (i) suddenly and significantly increasing and (ii) are causing or threatening to cause serious injury to the Community producers concerned. The Commission is aware of discussions taking place on this matter within certain Member States.

— With regard to the separate issue of farmed Atlantic salmon escaping from pens into the wild, this question falls outside the normal commercial aspects of anti-dumping proceedings. However, the concerns expressed regarding the River Teno are known to the Commission. The Commission facilitated a bilateral meeting between Finland and Norway on this issue two years ago. In addition, the North Atlantic Salmon Conservation Organisation (NASCO), to which both the Union and Norway are parties, has adopted a number of resolutions dealing with this general area since 1994. This includes, ‘inter alia’, Guidelines on containment of farmed salmon, adopted in June 2001. Norway reported to NASCO in March 2003 on its approach to the implementation of these resolutions stating that guidelines on containment are under development and would be subject to consultations during 2003. The first phase of new rules establishing protected zones for Atlantic salmon was also reported. The River Teno is one of 37 rivers where the salmon and its habitat is to be given priority over any activity that may be harmful to them in the scheme adopted by the Norwegian Parliament on 25 February 2003.

Large Rainbow Trout:

— As concerns large rainbow trout originating in Norway, the preliminary findings of the anti-dumping investigation carried out by the Commission show that Norwegian exports to the Community have been made at dumped, injurious price levels and that the Community Interest calls for action.

— Accordingly, the Commission has already taken measures in this regard by imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty of 21,4 % imposed by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1628/2003 of 17 September 2003 imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of large rainbow trout originating in Norway and the Faeroe Islands (2), which entered into force on 19 September 2003.

— This case will be further investigated and the Honourable Members can be assured that should injurious dumping be confirmed, and there are no compelling reasons against action, the Commission will propose definitive measures to the Council. In such circumstances, following recent jurisprudence of the European Court (3), definitive anti-dumping measures will have to be imposed.

(1) OJ L 349, 31.12.1994, as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2474/2000 of 9 November 2000 establishing, pursuant to Article 1(7) of Regulation (EEC) No 3030/93, the list of textiles and clothing products to be integrated into GATT 1994 on 1 January 2002 and amending Annex X to Regulation (EEC) No 3030/93 and Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 3285/94, OJ L 286, 11.11.2000.

(2) OJ L 232, 18.9.2003.

(3) Case C-76/01 P, Judgment of the Court dated 30 September 2003.