WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1834/96 by Heidi HAUTALA to the Commission. Consequences of annulment by the Court of Justice of the decision of the Agriculture Council (C-303/ 94)
Date: 1996-06-28
Institutions: European Parliament, HAUTALA
Subjects: Council of the European Union, EC Directive, action programme, agricultural policy, environmental protection, judgment of the Court (EU), marketing, pesticide, plant health product, water pollution













EUR-Lex - 91996E1834 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E1834

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1834/96 by Heidi HAUTALA to the Commission. Consequences of annulment by the Court of Justice of the decision of the Agriculture Council (C-303/ 94)  


Official Journal C 356 , 25/11/1996 P. 0100 





WRITTEN QUESTION P-1834/96 by Heidi Hautala (V) to the Commission (28 June 1996)Subject: Consequences of annulment by the Court of Justice of the decision of the Agriculture Council (C-303/94)On 18 June 1996 the Court of Justice annulled the decision of the Agriculture Council (94/43/EC) concerning the right of the Member States to pollute their surface and groundwaters beyond the limits already set.The annulment implies that the Commission and Member States must take the protection of human health and the environment seriously. The new Member States have a particular problem because they must now allow for a far more extensive variety of pesticides to be imported and used in their agriculture than before their accession to the European Union.In the fifth environmental action programme the Commission promised to make proposals on a gradual reduction in the use of pesticides in agriculture. Instruments which could be used are taxes on pesticide use, certificates for farmers using less pesticides and in particular the so-called substitution principle, as practiced in Denmark and Sweden and as now proposed in the biocide directive, which is under consideration.Will the Commission now draft a new Annex VI to the basic directive (91/414/EEC ((OJ L 230, 19.8.1991, p. 1. )) incorporating taxes, certificates and the substitution principle as a means of reducing the use of pesticides in agriculture and the damage caused by their use?Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (18 July 1996)The Commission has noted that the Court of justice has annulled Council Directive 94/43/EC of 27 July 1994 ((OJ L 227, 1.9.1994. )) establishing Annex VI to Directive 91/414/EEC ((OJ L 230, 19.8.1991. )) concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market.Article 4 of Directive 91/414/EEC provides general requirements for the Member States when authorizing plant protection products. The annulled Directive sought to set out these requirements of the basic Directive in more detail.In the light of the Court's judgement the Commission intends to forward rapidly to the Council a new proposal for such detailed requirements, to be included as Annex VI to the Directive, in order to ensure that the proper functioning of the Directive is no longer interrupted than strictly necessary. Such a proposal however cannot introduce taxes, certificates or the substitution principle since this would require an amendment of the basic Directive itself.Moreover, in the framework of the fifth environment programme a study is under way on the sustainable use of plant protection products and, in particular, on the most appropriate instruments to reduce use of plant protection products. This will permit the development, where necessary, of proposals further to integrate environmental considerations in agricultural policy.