WRITTEN QUESTION No. 341/99 by Riccardo NENCINI Growing competitiveness of imported rice following European Union concessions
Date: 1999-02-23
Institutions: European Parliament, NENCINI
Subjects: European Union, area of holding, common organisation of markets, competition, domestic market, import, producer price, rice, tariff preference, third country

29.11.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 341/95

(1999/C 341/133)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0341/99

by Riccardo Nencini (PSE) to the Commission

(23 February 1999)

Subject: Growing competitiveness of imported rice following European Union concessions

The common organisation of the market has proved incapable of playing an effective market guidance and
management role, owing to the fact that insufficient account has been taken of the increase in the areas under
rice and in production levels, the basic stability of consumption levels and the growing competitiveness of
imported rice following the many concessions which the European Union has made to third country and the
conclusion of the GATT agreements.

A full-blown crisis occurred during the 1996-97 and 1997-98 marketing years when the total area under rice
within the European Union rose to over 420 000 hectares while still remaining below the guaranteed
maximum area. The result was a major drop in producer prices and the withdrawal of substantial quantities of
rice.

The situation is so serious that Regulation (EC) 3072/95 (1) will probably need to be revised. However, this
must not be done until the forthcoming international trade negotiations (WTO agreements) have been
concluded and proper account has been taken of the impact of Agenda 2000, particularly on the arable crop
sector.

Does the Commission intend to determine whether it is possible to: transfer a large area (at least 50 000
hectares) from the local variety to the ‘world’ variety; make a distinction between ‘world’ rice and local rice as
far as compensatory aid payments are concerned; and, lastly, reduce the market price for ‘world’ rice by an
amount equivalent to the increase in compensatory payments, without cutting the intervention price?

(1) OJ L 329, 30.12.1995, p. 18.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(31 March 1999)

As the Honourable Member pointed out, the rice market has been unstable since the 1996/97 marketing year,
a fact evidenced by the large-scale recourse to intervention measures.

The Commission takes the view that it would be appropriate to introduce an initiative aimed at squaring
supply with demand once more within the Community. The Commission is currently considering several
options, one of which (that mentioned by the Honourable Member) is currently being closely scrutinised for its
compatibility with international agreements; the Commission is also assessing the possible impact of the
proposed measures on the Community market.

(1999/C 341/134)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0342/99

by Nelly Maes (ARE) to the Commission

(23 February 1999)

Subject: European Commission complaint against Belgium for failure to comply with the directive on waste

incineration

May I ask the Commission to state in what respect it considers Flemish legislation on waste incinerators to be
unsatisfactory?

Answer given by Ms Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(9 April 1999)

The Commission has indeed decided to bring the matter before the Court of Justice, in order to obtain
confirmation of undue transposition of Council Directive 89/369/EEC of 8 June 1989 on the prevention of air
pollution from new municipal waste incineration plants (1), and of Council Directive 89/429/EEC of 21 June
1989 on the reduction of air pollution from existing municipal waste-incineration plants (2).