WRITTEN QUESTION E-1669/99 by Arlindo Cunha (PPE-DE) to the Commission. EC-Greenland Agreement.
Date: 1999-09-22
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Greenland, agreement (EU), fishing agreement

C 203 E/18

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.7.2000

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(5 November 1999)

According to Community law as stated for example in Articles 95(3), 152(1) and 153(1) EC Treaty, the
Community has to ensure for consumers a high level of food quality and safety. Therefore, following the
findings and recommendations of the World trade organisation (WTO) dispute settlement body, the
Commission asked its scientific committee on veterinary matters relating to public health (SCVPH) to
deliver an opinion on the potential for adverse effects to human health from the administration of the six
hormones for animal growth promotion.

At the end of April 1999 the SCVPH delivered its opinion on the assessment of potential risks to human
health from hormone residues in bovine meat and meat products. Based on this scientific advice the
Commission decided that it could not propose to the Member States to lift the ban.

The United States and Canada initiated WTO procedures to suspend concessions because the period of
time to conform with the WTO findings expired on 13 May 1999. The Community asked for WTO
arbitration on the amount, as a result of which the United States were authorised to suspend concessions
for US$ 116 million, instead of the US$ 202 million they had requested. The Canadian authorisation was
limited to CAN$ 11 million instead of the CAN$ 75 million requested by Canada.

The Commission regrets that the United States and Canada have chosen to impose 100 % duties on a
number of European products, which not only affects the export business of several companies, but also
deprives American consumers of high quality goods produced in Europe.

Meanwhile, the Commission will continue to study the recent scientific data, in order to evaluate on this
basis, and in the light of any new relevant information, the steps which are necessary to be taken in the
light of the Community(cid:146)s WTO rights and obligations.

(2000/C 203 E/022)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1669/99

by Arlindo Cunha (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(22 September 1999)

Subject: EC-Greenland Agreement

the fact

that, under the Agreement between the European Community and Denmark
In view of
(representing the Greenland Local Government), which serves as a fisheries agreement, there are fishing
possibilities which are not used by the Member States,
is the Commission intending to retain the
agreement as a fisheries agreement, or is a cooperation agreement with Greenland finally being drawn up?

(2000/C 203 E/023)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1670/99

by Arlindo Cunha (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(22 September 1999)

Subject: EC-Greenland Fisheries Protocol

The Third Fisheries Protocol between the European Community and Denmark and the Greenland Local
Government, which has been in force since 1985, contains two separate components, the first concerned
with an exchange of quotas between the Parties and the acquisition of additional quotas and the second
intended to support the establishment of joint ventures and temporary business associations within
Greenland(cid:146)s fisheries sector.

Can the Commission say what kind of fisheries agreement it intends to negotiate with Greenland, bearing
in mind that both the current Fisheries Agreement and the Third Protocol will expire on 31 December
2000?