WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1995/98 by Anita POLLACK to the Commission. The Terminator Gene (SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER)
Date: 1998-06-30
Institutions: European Parliament, POLLACK
Subjects: agricultural production, biotechnology, developing countries, environmental protection, genetic engineering, genetically modified organism, marketing standard, public health, scientific research, seed

C 207/2

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

21.7.1999

price) and introducing a minimum excise duty for dark-tobacco (‘brune’) cigarettes 20 % below that for light-
tobacco (‘blonde’) cigarettes (400F per thousand as opposed to 500F per thousand).

The Commission’s conclusions included the finding that the new legislation failed to comply with Article 9(1)
of Council Directive 95/59/EC of 27 November 1995 on taxes other than turnover taxes which affect the
consumption of manufactured tobacco (1), which stipulates that the industry should be free to determine the
retail selling price for each of its products. The new obligation to set a price per thousand amounts to imposing
a minimum reference price. The Commission also considered that in having two minimum rates (500F per
thousand for all cigarette categories except dark-tobacco cigarettes, which would be taxed at 400F per
thousand), the new French legislation violated Community law (Council Directive 92/79/EEC of 19 October
1992 on the approximation of taxes on cigarettes (2), plus Directive 95/59/EC), which provided that an
identical minimum rate of excise duty should be applied to all makes and varieties of cigarette.

In addition, because most dark-tobacco cigarettes were made in France (the opposite is the case with light-
tobacco cigarettes), the new legislation failed to comply with the ban on tax discrimination and protection
contained in Article 95 of the EC Treaty.

The Commission consequently initiated infringement proceedings against France under Article 169 of the EC
Treaty. In that connection, it decided in December 1998 to forward a reasoned opinion.

2.
The Article 169 infringement proceedings for failure to comply with Community law allow for an
exchange of views between the Commission and the Member State involved. In this case, France did not react
to the notice which the Commission had sent.

(1) OJ L 291, 6.12.1995.
(2) OJ L 316, 31.10.1992.

(1999/C 207/002)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1995/98

by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission

(30 June 1998)

Subject: The Terminator Gene

What is the Commission’s estimate of the impact of Monsanto’s Terminator Gene over the next few years on
the livelihoods of farmers in developing countries?

(1999/C 207/003)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2418/98

by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission

(27 July 1998)

Subject: Monsanto and the terminator gene

What legal avenues are open to the EU to persuade or force Monsanto not to use its terminator gene?

Supplementary joint answer
to Written Questions E-1995/98 and E-2418/98
given by Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(13 January 1999)

The Commission is aware of the concerns about the development of plant varieties containing gene constructs
that prevent the formation of viable seeds (seeds deliberately disabled from germinating when sown, due to the
failure of the embryo to develop). This development is known as ‘terminator seed’. The Commission is aware
that the system has been demonstrated in tobacco as a model species while work on cotton is preliminary, but
the same technology could be developed for other crops.