WRITTEN QUESTION E-0149/00 by Brigitte Langenhagen (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Traffic separation schemes and interpretation of rules to prevent collisions in the German Bight.
Date: 2000-01-31
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Germany, International Maritime Organisation, international waters, interpretation of the law, law of the sea, maritime safety, maritime shipping, maritime surveillance, pleasure craft

C 330 E/92

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

21.11.2000

When horses are imported from Central and Eastern European third countries to Italy, the greater part of
the journey has taken place before reaching the Community border. The enforceability of Community
legislation regarding the protection of animals during transport taking place before the Community(cid:146)s
frontier is still under examination. Irrespective of this question, it is clear that once the animals have
reached the Community(cid:146)s frontiers there can be no doubt that the relevant rules are fully applicable.

There have been various contacts with the principal Central and Eastern European countries involved in
the transport of livestock to the Community in relation to animal welfare, and the relevant legislation of
those third countries has been obtained. The Commission will consider making more formal approaches to
the third countries concerned in due course.

In this framework, and given the priority of the subject, the issue of long distance transport of animals and
in particular horses will be discussed and analysed in the second meeting of chiefs of veterinary services of
the associated countries on 28/29th March 2000.

The Commission will also in due course take a decision as to whether to open infringement proceedings
under Article 226 (ex Article 169) EC Treaty in respect of Italy(cid:146)s failure to adequately enforce the rules of
the animal transport directives.

(1) OJ L 148, 30.6.1995.

(2000/C 330 E/102)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0149/00

by Brigitte Langenhagen (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(31 January 2000)

Subject: Traffic separation schemes and interpretation of rules to prevent collisions in the German Bight

Concerning the interpretation of rules to prevent collisions in the German Bight, the frequency with which
fines are imposed for infringement of these regulations are a source of irritation, in particular for German
sailing federations.

To what extent are rules to prevent collisions in the relevant areas of the German Bight inter-

1.
nationally recognised?

2.

3.

Is compliance of these rules monitored by international organisations?

Is the Commission aware that these rules are interpreted differently in the various Member States?

4. What possibilities does the Commission see of harmonising at European level the interpretation and
implementation of measures to prevent collisions?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(2 March 2000)

The navigation of all vessels (including small boats and yachts) is regulated by the Convention on the
international regulations for preventing collisions at sea (Colregs).

1.
The Commission is aware of some legal discussions over the precise powers of the coastal state over
navigation in areas of the German Bight which lie outside the territorial sea area. However, it is unaware of
any special rules in the German Bight which conflict with the requirements of the Colregs. It would be
expected that the Colregs would be applied and enforced in the German Bight area.

21.11.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 330 E/93

Implementation of

is the
2.
responsibility of the flag state of the vessel to ensure that its vessels comply with the rules. Coastal states
may monitor compliance and prosecute an offending vessel(cid:146)s master under their national laws if the vessel
enters port.

the Colregs is not supervised by any international organisation.

It

3.
The Commission is not aware of any differences in interpretation of the Colregs in Member States as
the rules have evolved over a long time and their interpretation has been discussed and agreed by
International maritime organisation (IMO) Member States.

The Commission therefore has no evidence of any need for harmonisation of the application of the

4.
Colregs in the Community.

(2000/C 330 E/103)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0152/00

by Mar(cid:237)a Sornosa Mart(cid:237)nez (PSE) to the Commission

(31 January 2000)

Subject: Exceeding of maximum permissible nitrate levels in water for human consumption in the

Community of Valencia (Spain)

At the end of last year a report by the water control unit of the government of the Community of Valencia
was published showing that the water intended for human consumption in 46 municipal districts in the
Community of Valencia contained more than the permitted amount of nitrates laid down by the European
Union and the World Health Organisation. This means that more than 375 000 persons (10 % of
Valencians) are exposed to the health risks posed by nitrates (notably, cancer in adults and anaemia in
children).

The main source of this kind of water pollution is the excessive and improper use of nitrogenous fertilising
for farming in the area. The Government of Valencia has responded to this serious situation merely by
declaring 193 municipal districts to be at risk from nitrate pollution, without doing anything else to
remedy the situation. In so doing, the government has merely applied Community legislation incorrectly
by complying with formal requirements without attempting to remedy the problem.

Bearing in mind the provisions of Directive 98/83/EC on the quality of water intended for human
consumption (1) and Directive 91/676/EC concerning the protection of waters against pollution caused by
nitrates from agricultural sources (2) as well as the requirements to be laid down in the future framework
directive on water,
is the Commission aware of the breaches of Community legislation involving the
exceeding of maximum permitted nitrate levels affecting the people of Valencia. If so, what measures has it
taken or will it take to safeguard the health of these citizens?

(1) OJ L 330, 5.12.1998, p. 32.
(2) OJ L 375, 31.12.1991, p. 1.

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

(30 March 2000)

The Commission is aware of the problem the Honourable Member has raised regarding the pollution of
water intended for human consumption due to exceedance of the maximum authorised level of nitrates.

The Court of Justice has already condemned Spain for failing to comply with Council Directive 91/676/
EEC of 12 December 1991 concerning the protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from
agricultural sources. The failings noted by the Court included failure to designate vulnerable zones and
failure to adopt codes of good agricultural practice (1).