WRITTEN QUESTION E-2554/99 by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission. Incinerators.
Date: 2000-01-11
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Japan, United States, environmental standard, legal basis, waste incineration

24.10.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 303 E/79

to bring about a protectionist
How does the Commission intend to oppose this renewed attempt
restriction on world trade on the eve of the WTO Millennium Round? How does it intend to ensure,
particularly in the current negotiations with the candidate countries, that the principle of free trade is
understood and enforced?

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(24 January 2000)

The Commission notes the well-known concerns expressed by the Honourable Member concerning
advance protection of beer varieties.
In the current discussions within the World trade organization
(WTO) Agreement on trade-related aspects of intellectual property rights (TRIPs agreement) concerning the
establishment of a so-called multilateral register for the protection of wines and spirits, the Commission is
also considering the proposal of an increase of protectable subject matters in order to include other
agricultural and foodstuff products

A multilateral register will have to be based on the TRIPs agreement and, thus, has to fully respect the
provisions contained therein. This implies that WTO members do not have to grant protection for
geographical indications with respect to goods if it is demonstrated that the relevant indication is identical
with the term customary in common language. Consequently, WTO members do not have to grant
protection to these so-called generic names which might relate to a certain production method rather than
to a geographical indication. The future register will not change this essential provision since (cid:129) as far as a
geographical name is concerned (cid:129) the matter could be challenged through an objection by the WTO
member concerned.

The discussions will,
necessarily distorting free trade in products with generic names.

therefore,

lead to an enhanced protection for European right-holders without

(2000/C 303 E/070)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2554/99

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(11 January 2000)

Subject: Incinerators

Would the Commission please outline whether there are EU emission and other environmental standards
for waste incinerators, and how these compare with those in force in the United States and Japan?

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

(9 February 2000)

There are currently three pieces of Community legislation aimed at limiting emissions from incineration
plants. These are Council Directive 94/67/EC of 16 December 1994 on the incineration of hazardous
waste (1), Council Directive 89/369/EEC of 8 June 1989 on the prevention of air pollution from new
municipal waste incineration plants (2) and Council Directive 89/429/EEC of 21 June 1989 on the
reduction of air pollution from existing municipal waste-incineration plants (3). In future, all three pieces
of legislation will be repealed and replaced by a single directive, which will set emission limit values for all
relevant pollutants. The Council adopted a common position (4) on the future directive on incineration on
25 November 1999. The second reading will take place in March 2000 and the final adoption is expected
for autumn 2000. The proposed emission limit values will become applicable to existing plants five years
after the adoption of the directive, that is to say probably in autumn 2005.

C 303 E/80

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

24.10.2000

It is difficult to compare the existing and future standards of the Community with those of the United
States or Japan. Other countries apply a different definition of waste and a different scope of application.
Moreover, settings such as standard oxygen contents of flue gas or different measurement intervals
complicate a comparison.

(1) OJ L 365, 31.12.1994.
(2) OJ L 163, 14.6.1989.
(3) OJ L 203, 15.7.1989.
(4) Press Release No 13293/99.

(2000/C 303 E/071)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2560/99

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(11 January 2000)

Subject: Sea water cleanliness

Would the Commission please publish the latest available figures showing the cleanliness of sea water at
the principal European Union coastal resorts, together with the equivalent figures for each resort for each
of the last five years?

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

(17 January 2000)

The annual reporting obligations under Council Directive 76/160/EEC of 8 December 1975 concerning
the quality of bathing water (1) imply that a quality assessment of Member States(cid:146) bathing waters is made
after each bathing season.

The Directive requires that the data be reported to the Commission by 31 December by the responsible
authority of the Member State. The Commission collects all these data for its annual report that is
presented before the next bathing season around mid-May. The data on the 1999 bathing season will
therefore be presented in May 2000.

The latest available data are at the moment those of the 1998 bathing season. The references of the annual
paper report are: Quality of bathing water (1998 bathing season), May 1999 (cid:129) EUR 18831. This
information can also be found on the Europa internet site at http://europa.eu.int/water/water-bathing/
index_html. The atlas on the internet site gives the quality status of each individual bathing area since
1992.

(1) OJ L 31, 5.2.1976.

(2000/C 303 E/072)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2609/99

by Mogens Camre (UEN) to the Commission

(12 January 2000)

Subject: Breaches of human rights in Turkey

The Copenhagen criteria of 1993 require countries wishing to become members of the EU to guarantee
human rights and respect and protect minorities. According to Parliament(cid:146)s Resolution of 6 October 1999
Turkey is still far away from meeting these criteria. For example, official Turkish policy includes a
prohibition on Christian religious activities and the Christian cathedral of Hagia Sophia is still under
Muslim occupation.

These clear breaches of human rights openly flout the Copenhagen criteria and it would therefore be
interesting to know what demands the Commission makes on Turkey in the course of their present
collaboration.

Under Article 28 of the Association Agreement Turkey receives aid from the European Union. Will the
Commission therefore describe the demands it makes in the course of its relations with Turkey regarding
Turkey(cid:146)s treatment of its Christian minority?