WRITTEN QUESTION E-1553/99 by Olivier Dupuis (TDI) to the Commission. European CITES regulation and France.
Date: 1999-09-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Botswana, France, Namibia, Zimbabwe, animal life, infringement of EU law, international trade, protected species, wild mammal

1.8.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 219 E/7

(2000/C 219 E/010)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1553/99

by Olivier Dupuis (TDI) to the Commission

(1 September 1999)

Subject: European CITES regulation and France

At the last conference of the parties to CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of
Wild Fauna and Flora) held in Harare (Zimbabwe) in June 1997, it was decided by a majority of more than
two thirds of
its members to transfer the African elephant populations of Botswana, Namibia and
Zimbabwe from Annex I (trade banned) to Annex II (controlled trade) of the Convention. This change of
category enabled the three countries to legally export trophies, live specimens and certain products derived
from elephants. They will also be authorised, as of 18 March 1999, providing certain conditions are met,
to sell their legal stocks of raw ivory to a single purchaser, Japan. By this decision, the international
community recognised that the elephant populations of the three Southern African countries were not
under threat and demonstrated its approval of the effective fauna management policies pursued by these
countries, particularly through national community development programmes under which rural popula-
tions participate in and benefit from the management and conservation of wildlife resources. In November
1997, the Commission approved, on a qualified-majority basis, a regulation updating, following the
decisions taken at the Harare conference, Council Regulation No 338/97 (1) on the application of CITES
in the European Union. The amended regulation authorised, throughout the European Union, among other
things, imports of live elephants and certain products derived from elephants originating in Botswana,
Namibia and Zimbabwe. The regulation is directly applicable in all the Member States of the European
Union.

However, France does not agree with the decision and, on 1 September 1998, a ministerial decree came
into force prohibiting the importation of Southern African elephants and certain derivative products into
France, thereby contravening the European regulation which does not allow stricter unilateral action. Is the
Commission aware of the measure taken by France? If it is, has it notified France that the decree
constitutes a breach of Community law? Does the Commission therefore intend,
if it has not already
done so, to bring legal action against France before the European Court of Justice for contravening
Community law?

(1) OJ L 61, 3.3.1997, p. 1.

Answer given by Mrs Wallstr(cid:246)m on behalf of the Commission

(18 November 1999)

The Commission has not received notification from France of any specific acts or provisions that it may
have adopted on the importation of and trade in trophies, live specimens or certain products derived from
elephants of the species Loxodonta africana (African elephant) from the populations of Botswana, Namibia
and Zimbabwe, with a view to implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 338/97 of 9 December 1996 on
the protection of species of wild fauna and flora by regulating trade therein (1), as amended in particular by
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2307/97 of 18 November 1997 (2).

The Commission has not received notification of the Ministerial Decree referred to by the Honourable
Member which apparently entered into force on 1 September 1998 and prohibits the importation into
French territory of elephants from Southern Africa and certain products derived therefrom.

However, enquiries have shown that, as the Honourable Member states, at least one Inter-Ministerial
Decree has indeed been adopted in this area by France but has not been notified in any form to the
Commission. This is the Decree of 30 June 1998 (cid:145)on the importation, transport and commercialisation of
certain specimens of African elephants(cid:146).

Under Article 20 of Regulation (EC) No 338/97, as amended,
Commission and the Convention secretariat of
implementation of
this Regulation and of all
implementation and enforcement(cid:146);

(cid:145)each Member State shall notify the
the provisions which it adopts specifically for the
instruments used and measures taken for its
legal

C 219 E/8

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

1.8.2000

Having confirmed the lack of notification at least of the abovementioned Decree of 30 June 1998, which
represents a breach by France of Article 20 of the Regulation, the Commission will consider as soon as
possible what action to take on this matter.

(1) OJ L 61, 3.3.1997.
(2) OJ L 325, 27.11.1997, p. 1.

(2000/C 219 E/011)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1554/99

by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission

(1 September 1999)

Subject: Crisis in the pig farming sector

Can the Commission confirm whether overproduction in the above sector is at around 20 %?

If so, does it believe that this is the main reason for the crisis proclaimed by the pig farming associations,
or does it consider that there are other reasons? If so, what are they?

Could the Commission limit overproduction by introducing Community ceilings?

Does it not believe that a level playing field could be achieved for all if uniform environmental and health
legislation were adopted throughout the EU?

Why does the Commission not match each importation of zero duty pigs from non-member states with an
exportation of equal quantities of processed pigmeat to markets outside the Community?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(11 October 1999)

Production of pigmeat in the Community has increased during recent years. Total production in 1997 was
16,25 million tonnes and in 1998 production increased by 8 % to 17,56 million tonnes. During 1999
production is still expected to increase by around 2 %, the increase being mainly in the first half of the
year. In the second half of 1999 and through the first half of 2000 production is forecasted to decline. The
exports of pigmeat to third countries, which were aided by export refunds, amounted to 743 000 tonnes
in the General agreement on tariffs and trade (GATT) year 4 (1 July 1998 to 30 June 1999), which
represents 4 % of the total production and which could be regarded as oversupply.

Oversupply of pigs was definitely one of the major reasons for very low producer prices in the second half
of 1998 and in the first half of 1999. Pig markets have a cyclical nature with high production and,
consequently, low price periods recurring every three to five years. However, there were also other reasons.
Economic crises in main importing countries and increased competition from other exporting countries
added difficulties for the European pig industry.

The Commission has discussed with Member States possible measures to limit production on several
occasions, but these measures have received little support from the majority of Member States. In these
meetings the Commission has also stressed that Member States should fully implement Community and
national legislation on environmental issues, which should help preventive excessive production peaks.

The quotas for zero duty imports for GATT year 1998-1999 were 7 000 tonnes. However, only
2 500 tonnes were imported. For the same GATT year the Community had a ceiling for subsidised
pigmeat exports of 483 000 tonnes, which was fully used. Therefore, the Community exports were many
times the zero duty imports.