WRITTEN QUESTION E-1561/99 by Carmen Fraga Estévez (PPE-DE) to the Commission. List of vessels that have stopped using drift-nets in compliance with Regulation (EC) 1239/98.
Date: 1999-09-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: building regulations, conservation of fish stocks, fishing net, fishing statistics, fishing vessel

20.6.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 170 E/33

Reply

(2 December 1999)

The Council would remind the Honourable Member that the Treaty of Amsterdam confirmed that
consumer policy is an area to which the European Community can and must bring added value.
Article 153(1) of the Treaty establishing the European Community defines the Community(cid:146)s objectives in
that connection, in particular having regard to its links with health policy and with promoting the right of
consumers to information.

In that context, and more particularly with respect to the questions raised, the Council would inform the
Honourable Member that Regulation No 258/97 applies to foods and food ingredients placed on the
market before it entered into force only if they (cid:145)have not hitherto been used for human consumption to a
significant degree within the Community(cid:146)
In such cases, the initial
assessment procedure laid down in Article 6 applies.

(Article 1(2) of the Regulation).

It is for the Commission, and more particularly the Standing Committee for Foodstuffs (cf. Article 1(3) of
the Regulation), to determine by committee procedure whether a type of food or food ingredient falls
within the scope of the Regulation, and to lay down (in principle on a case-by-case basis) the qualitative
criteria attached to each such type of food or food ingredient in order to determine whether it is covered
by the Regulation.

It should also be emphasised that Article 1 of Regulation No 258/97 makes no distinction between foods
and food ingredients, and this applies in particular when it comes to identifying the content and scope of
approval in the Member State concerned.

Finally, the Council would suggest that the Honourable Member contact the Commission directly regarding
those questions which have not been answered, as they are within its field of competence.

(2000/C 170 E/033)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1537/99

by Carmen Fraga EstØvez (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(1 September 1999)

Subject: Compliance with Regulation (EC) 1239/98 outlawing fishing with driftnets

Regulation (EC) 1239/98 of 8 June 1998 (1) amending Regulation (EC) 0894/97 laying down certain
technical measures for the conservation of fishery resources outlaws the use of driftnets by Community
vessels, as of 1 January 2002. Nonetheless, the Regulation authorises the phasing-out of driftnets as of
1998: Article 1(3) states that in 1998 the maximum number of vessels which may be authorised by a
Member State to carry on board or fish with one or more driftnets shall not exceed 60 % of the number of
vessels which used one or more driftnets over the period 1995-1997. The second fishing season for the
longfinned tuna (Thunnus alalunga) since the Regulation came into force has already started.

In view of this, does the Commission consider the situation to be satisfactory as regards the two fishing
seasons thus far? What is the Commission(cid:146)s evaluation of the degree of compliance with the Regulation by
the fleets concerned?

(1) OJ L 171, 17.6.1998, p. 1.

(2000/C 170 E/034)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1561/99

by Carmen Fraga EstØvez (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(1 September 1999)

Subject: List of vessels that have stopped using drift-nets in compliance with Regulation (EC) 1239/98

Council Regulation (EC) 1239/98 (1) of 8 June 1998 amending Regulation (EC) 0894/97 laying down
fishery resources, bans the use of drift-nets by
certain technical measures for the conservation of

C 170 E/34

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.6.2000

Community vessels as of 1 January 2002. In view of the fact that the use of such gear by Member States(cid:146)
fleets may be phased out gradually, Article 1(4) of the abovementioned regulation provides that Member
States shall communicate to the Commission the list of vessels authorised to carry out fishing activities
using drift-nets for each target species, as listed in the annex to the Regulation, by 30 April 1998, the
information shall be sent not later than 31 July 1998.

Can the Commission provide a list of vessels which were authorised to carry out fishing activities

1.
using drift-nets in the period 1995 to 1997?

Can the Commission provide the lists of vessels authorised to carry out fishing activities using drift-

2.
nets in 1998 and 1999 which should already have been submitted by the Member States?

Based on a comparison of the lists requested, can the Commission guarantee that the provisions of

3.
Article 1(3) of Regulation (EC) 1239/98 are being complied with?

(1) OJ L 171, 17.6.1998. p. 1.

Joint answer
to Written Questions P-1537/99 and E-1561/99
given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(8 October 1999)

The Member States concerned have sent the Commission the information referred to in Article 11a(4) of
Regulation (EC) 0894/97 laying down certain technical measures for the conservation of
fishery
resources (1).

According to this information, the number of fishing vessels driftnetting for long finned tuna in the north-
east Atlantic in the period from 1995 to 1997 and the number of vessels authorised to do so in 1998 and
1999 were as follows:

France

Ireland

United Kingdom

TOTAL

1995

60

12

76

1996

63

>30

8

77

1997

43

5

51

1998

1999

43

18

6

67

41

18

6

65

The information provided by the Member States in question shows that the requirement laid down in
Article 11a(3) of Regulation (EC) 0894/97 is being complied with. The Commission will verify the data
provided by the Member States for the 1995-1997 period as part of the checks conducted under Article
29 of Council Regulation (EEC) 2847/93 establishing a control system applicable to the common fisheries
policy (2).

(1) OJ L 132, 23.5.1997.
(2) OJ L 261, 20.10.1993.

(2000/C 170 E/035)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1558/99

by Richard Corbett (PSE) to the Commission

(1 September 1999)

Subject: Regional funding

Is it really the case that Luxembourg, the richest Member State in per capita terms, has had the largest
percentage in regional fund allocations under Agenda 2000? Does the Commission think this is justified?