WRITTEN QUESTION P-2180/99 by Luciana Sbarbati (ELDR) to the Commission. Conservation of fishery resources in the Mediterranean.
Date: 1999-11-19
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Denmark, European Economic Area, Norway, common commercial policy, customs duties, meat

C 203 E/146

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.7.2000

(2000/C 203 E/185)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2178/99

by Karin Riis-Jłrgensen (ELDR) to the Commission

(19 November 1999)

Subject: Customs duties on meat exports to Norway

Further to my oral question H-0389/99 for Question Time to the Commission at the May 1999 part-
session (1), does the Commission consider that it is in accordance with the trade agreements between
Norway and the EU for a Danish company exporting meat to Norway to be subject to customs duty of
NOK 84,31 per kilo of meat?

For information, the net cost of the product in question is DKK 16,50 for 850 g.

(1) Debates of the European Parliament (May 1999).

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(26 November 1999)

The current agreement between Norway and the Community is the European economic area (EEA)
Agreement. Article 8 of the Agreement excludes agricultural products from its application, except for
certain closely specified products. Further the EEA is not a customs area, so the Agreement has no
influence on the Norwegian tariff structure. There is therefore nothing in the Agreement to regulate the
duty paid by Community exporters to Norway.

(2000/C 203 E/186)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2180/99

by Luciana Sbarbati (ELDR) to the Commission

(19 November 1999)

Subject: Conservation of fishery resources in the Mediterranean

Article 2(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1626/94 (1) laying down certain technical measures for the
conservation of fishery resources in the Mediterranean provides that (cid:145)The use of encircling and towed nets
set from a boat and operated from the shore (shore seines) shall be prohibited as from 1 January 2002
unless the Council ((cid:133)) decides otherwise in the light of scientific data providing that their use does not
have a negative impact on resources(cid:146).

This ban prompts questions about the survival of this particular method of fishing along many parts of the
Mediterranean littoral, and especially in the Adriatic. Since this technique differs significantly from both
trawling and encircling, it does not pose any risk to the environment or to marine resources, because it
complies with relevant criteria such as the minimum and maximum dimensions of net meshes, wings,
bunts and codends, periods and hours of use, etc.

Can the Commission state what measures it intends to adopt in future to help safeguard the various fishing
traditions which form part of the historic cultural heritage of many regions throughout the Mediterranean?

In particular, does the Commission not consider that the criteria and procedures for granting exemptions
from the ban on shore seine fishing provided for by the above Regulation (Article 2(3)) may prove to be
unduly rigid?

(1) OJ L 171, 6.7.1994, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(3 December 1999)

The measure to which the Honourable Member refers was adopted by the Council in 1994 in order to
preserve juvenile fish from the impact of fishing gear used very close to the sea shore, where fish spend a
part of their cycle.

18.7.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 203 E/147

A temporary derogation has been granted in order to allow fishermen to adapt to this new situation. The
derogation is expected to end on 31 December 2001 unless scientific evidence shows that its continuation
will have no negative impact on fish resources.

The Commission, on the basis of the most recent scientific studies, will prepare a proposal to the Council
on whether the derogation should or should not continue. The decision is to be taken by the Council by
qualified majority.

This procedure is not particularly rigid or exceptional. In fact, similar procedures have been foreseen in a
number of similar situations (as an example, see Articles 3(1) and 6(1) of the Regulation to which the
Honourable Member refers).

(2000/C 203 E/187)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2186/99

by Christos Folias (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(29 November 1999)

Subject: Infringement of Community Customs Code

Community customs legislation applies to the transport, transit and storage in free zones of Community
goods to which (and to which only) the provisions concerning simplified procedures and formalities apply.

In Greece, the local customs offices and the customs authorities are jointly responsible with the Piraeus
Port Authority for implementing Community Regulations and the Community Customs Code.

Obviously, the transit and temporary storage of the goods within the free zones does not change the rules
governing the goods in transit and does not affect their being subject to the simplified procedures.

Companies in the business of
transporting Community goods have repeatedly asked the customs
authorities, particularly those in Piraeus and the Piraeus Port Authority, for permission to use wharves in
the port of Piraeus or any other location for unloading Community goods where the simplified procedures
for the transit and storage of Community freight apply, so that the companies concerned can avoid
moving their goods several times and incurring higher costs and delays, etc.

Both the customs authorities and the Piraeus Port Authority have put forward various reasons for not
applying these procedures to Community goods in transit or storage.

Will the Commission investigate the arrangements for the transit and storage of Community goods and the
failure to apply the simplified procedures in cases where those procedures must be applied?

What measures will
infringement of Community
legislation and, in particular, to the failure of the customs authorities themselves and the Piraeus Port
Authority in Greece to apply Community Regulations and the Community Customs Code correctly?

the Commission take in response to the flagrant

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(20 December 1999)

I would refer the Honourable Member to the reply which the Commission gave to written question E-762/
98 put by Mr Georg Jarzembowski. (1)