WRITTEN QUESTION P-2391/00

by Antonio Di Pietro (ELDR) to the Commission

(7 July 2000)

Subject: Import permit for the Shifco fleet

Somalia is not one of the third countries allowed to import fishery products intended for human consumption listed in the Annex to Commission Decision 97/296/EC(1) and hence imports from that country have not been authorised since 1 July 1998, the date on which the Community law governing the harmonisation of conditions for the import of fishery products came into force.

On 5 February 1998 Shifco, a Somali firm with 5 freezer ships operating in the fisheries sector, applied for Community import authorisation, on the basis of Article 11(6) of Council Directive of 22 July 1991 (91/493/EEC(2)), which allows derogations to be requested in particular situations.

In response to this application Commission inspectors were sent on mission to Aden (Yemen) in November 1998 to carry out an inspection, as a result of which they asked Shifco to make a whole series of technical modifications to the fleet. This work was carried out, despite difficult environmental conditions and very high costs. In the end the UAV (veterinary food hygiene authority) issued a favourable opinion in its final inspection report (mentioning clearly the type of ships inspected, i.e. freezer ships).

Now, two years later, the relevant Commission department has discovered that Directive 91/493/EEC only applies to factory ships, not to freezer ships, of which the Shifco fleet has always consisted.

If, therefore, the above-mentioned directive does not apply to freezer ships, why did the Commission inspectors request alterations to be made? Is a particular person responsible for this oversight? How can the Commission remedy the damage caused to Shifco, not only to recover the cost of work carried out unnecessarily, but also to compensate for the serious economic and social consequences of suspension of work for the 500 Italian crew members and above all the approximately 2 000 Somali employees?

(1) OJ L 122, 14.5.1997, p. 21.

(2) OJ L 268, 24.9.1991, p. 15.

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(15 September 2000)

As mentioned by the Honourable Member, Commission experts carried out an on-the-spot check on the five vessels operated by the company in question on 18 November 1998. This inspection revealed that the vessels were in fact freezer vessels and not factory vessels as had been indicated in the documents provided by the company before the inspection. The inspection also revealed minor deficiencies of the vessels, and the company immediately engaged itself to correct these.

Since then the Commission has provided representatives of this company with all the information requested and has done everything possible to assist them in identifying possible solutions to the problems linked to the request for a derogation based on Article 11.6 of the Council Directive 91/493/EEC of 22 July 1991 laying down the health conditions for the production and the placing on the market of fishery products. The Commission recognises the difficulties the company is facing which are largely due to the absence of controls by a competent authority in Somalia. The company must now assess the possible solutions indicated and determine which of them best suits their intention to export fishery products through their vessels to the Community.