WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2181/98 by Jan MULDER to the Commission. BSE and the adverse consequences for exports of animals and animal products from the countries affected
Date: 1998-07-10
Institutions: European Parliament, MULDER
Subjects: World Trade Organisation, animal disease, animal product, cattle, export, health control, live animal, plant health control, third country, trade restriction

5.2.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 31/131

(1999/C 31/181)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2181/98

by Jan Mulder (ELDR) to the Commission

(10 July 1998)

Subject: BSE and the adverse consequences for exports of animals and animal products from the countries

affected

The occurrence of BSE in some EU Member States has marked adverse consequences with regard to export
opportunities for animals and animal products from the countries affected. The Netherlands is an example of this
situation, where the two cases of BSE in 1997 are still preventing the traditional exports to certain countries from
being resumed.

Can the Commission indicate what policy it is following to help the countries concerned to resume their

1.
traditional exports and possibly to develop new export opportunities?

Can it indicate its policy in international bodies with regard to establishing provisions which take a clear

2.
risk analysis into account if trade restrictions are to be applied?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(7 September 1998)

The Commission is aware that many third countries are currently imposing unjustified import restrictions on
animals and products from Member States, claiming the presence of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) as
a reason. The Commission is making every effort, both in bilateral discussions with the countries concerned and
in relevant international organisations, to ensure that Community exports are not subject to such restrictions.

In particular, the Community position was put forward vigorously in the meeting of the International office for
epizootics (OIE) in Paris in May 1998. As far as BSE is concerned, the OIE is the reference organisation for the
adoption of standards, guidelines and recommendations, recognised by the World trade organisation (WTO)
agreement on the application of sanitary and phytosanitary measures (SPS agreement), which affect international
trade in animals and animal products. The SPS agreement requires health measures affecting international trade
to be based on scientific principles. An important role is played by the assessment, as appropriate to the
circumstances, of the risks to human, animal or plant life or health, as outlined in article 5 of the SPS agreement.

The Commission will continue to press for the respect of the SPS agreement by countries importing animals and
animal products from the Community.

(1999/C 31/182)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2183/98

by Sirkka-Liisa Anttila (ELDR) to the Commission

(7 July 1998)

Subject: Protection of the conditions for oilseed production in Finland in connection with the Agenda 2000

reforms

In Finland 95 % of oilseed crops are spring-sown, i.e. oilseed rape which requires only a short growing season. It
was only in the 1970s, when reliable spring-sown varieties came on the market, that oilseed production began to
take off rapidly. The areas of rapeseed cultivation were at their greatest extent at the end of the 1980s and in 1995,
the first year of EU membership, when the total area exceeded 85 000 ha. With EU membership, Finland(cid:146)s oilseed
production too had to comply with the quotas laid down in the Blair House agreement. At the higher levels of
CAP subsidies, Finland is permitted to have only 63 000 ha under oilseed.

The Blair House agreement meant a reduction in oilseed growers(cid:146) production opportunities in Finland and clearly
weakened the economic competitiveness of this sector in relation to the alternatives. In connection with EU
membership Finland was authorised for a transitional period to pay a top-up price to farmers producing bread
cereals and malting barley which compete with oilseed rape in this area. On arable farms in southern Finland
(an A-subsidy area) rapeseed became less profitable for this reason and the areas in production in this principal