WRITTEN QUESTION E-0213/00 by Gérard Caudron (PSE) to the Commission. Harmonisation of rules on the transport of dangerous goods by road.
Date: 2000-02-04
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: common transport policy, road transport, transport of dangerous goods

26.1.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 26 E/19

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(8 March 2000)

The Commission is following very closely the human rights situation in the Democratic Republic of Congo
(DRC) and is aware of the recent report of Amnesty International on the subject.

The Commission is engaged in initiatives to give direct assistance in support of the human rights situation
in the DRC, in order to prepare a programme aimed at improving the judicial system and at contributing
to the establishment of the rule of law in the DRC. A specialist funded by the Commission has been
working in Kinshasa for a year now in close contact with the delegation of the Commission, the ministries
of Human Rights and Justice, the United Nations (UN) High Commissioner for human rights, representa-
tives of the local civil society and other donors.

to local human rights
The programme to be funded will deal with aspects such as the support
organisations, the rehabilitation of the judicial system, and assistance in the publication of a national
register.

The Commission is also ready to examine and, where appropriate, give support to, any valid initiative
intended to promote the respect for human rights in the region.

(2001/C 26 E/022)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0213/00

by GØrard Caudron (PSE) to the Commission

(4 February 2000)

Subject: Harmonisation of rules on the transport of dangerous goods by road

A directive on the approximation of the laws of the Member States concerning the transport of dangerous
goods by road came into force on 1 January 1997, containing a number of transitional provisions valid
until 1 January 1999. After that date, Parliament should have been asked for its opinion on a Commission
proposal to end these derogations.

Under the usual procedure, it is the European Committee for Standardisation (ECS) which proposes rules
in this field. The ECS was not able to complete its work in the time available. As a result, the Commission
has proposed a directive designed to amend the existing directive, providing a short-term solution to the
problems rather than ending the transitional arrangements, as it was supposed to do. This is exactly what
happened in the case of the transport of dangerous goods by rail, except for the fact that a deadline was
fixed.

Is the Commission able to say when the ECS will submit the results of its work to Parliament?

Until that happens, it is pointless for the Member States to amend their national rules. A certain amount of
flexibility has therefore been introduced with the Member States being given the option of adopting or
applying different rules.

The Member States may also continue to apply their own rules for certain types of transportable pressure
equipment for which there are no European rules. They may also adopt different provisions for local
transport or ad hoc shipments.

How does the Commission plan to ensure a minimum level of coordination at European level? In any case,
it is deplorable that in a field as crucial as the transport of dangerous goods the Commission continues to
put off the adoption of harmonised rules, thereby jeopardising human safety and the environment?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(27 March 2000)

As stressed by the Honourable Member the transitional arrangements under Council Directive 94/55/EC of
21 November 1994 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the transport of
dangerous goods by road are linked to the progress made in the activities of the European Committee for
Standardisation (CEN/ECS) (1).

C 26 E/20

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

26.1.2001

The majority of the CEN standards applying to the vessels and tanks used to transport gases should be
finalised, and thus incorporated in those annexes, during the next adaptation to technical process of the
annexes to Directive 94/55/EC, planned for 1 July 2001.

In the meantime the Commission will continue to ensure that the laws in force are consistent, and to that
end is proposing an amendment to the provisions on the carriage of dangerous goods in order to bring
this in line with Council Directive 1999/36/EC of 29 April 1999 on transportable pressure equipment (2).
Parliament gave a favourable reception to that proposal on first reading.

Member States requests regarding the possibility of adopting different provisions applying to local
transport are subject to acceptance by a committee consisting of all the Member States and chaired by
the Commission. This would enable the maximum of coordination needed at European level to be
provided.

(1) OJ L 319, 12.12.1994.
(2) OJ L 138, 1.6.1999.

(2001/C 26 E/023)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0214/00

by Bernard Poignant (PSE) to the Commission

(4 February 2000)

Subject: The wreck of the (cid:145)Erika(cid:146) and compensation for the fisheries and aquaculture sector from the

Structural Funds

The wreck of the (cid:145)Erika(cid:146) resulted in serious economic damage to the fisheries and aquaculture sector, one
already hard hit by various crises. Some fishermen have lost their fishing grounds around the sunken parts
of the (cid:145)Erika(cid:146)s(cid:146) hull, which constitute veritable (cid:145)delayed-action bombs(cid:146). Others have lost the tools of their
trade, which have been polluted by fuel oil. They have all refused to put to sea for some time and have lost
valuable fishing days.

As for the oyster farmers, some have paid dearly for the disaster: oils slicks have penetrated their oyster
farms and destroyed not only the oysters themselves but also the equipment used in oyster farming.

Finally, consumer confidence in these seafood products has dwindled away, with falling sales the likely
outcome.

Faced by this economic catastrophe, persons who have suffered damage may apply for compensation from
FIPOL (International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund). However, no emergency aid is granted within the
European Union.

Press releases dated 4 and 13 January 2000 indicate, however, that the European Commission takes the
view that the Structural Funds might be used to assist victims of the storm.

Is the European Union also contemplating using these Funds to aid the fishermen and oyster farmers who
were victims of the oil spill? If so, what will it do if some regions which are dependent on fishing are not
eligible under Objective 2?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(20 March 2000)

The Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance (FIFG) may contribute towards compensating the losses
suffered by fishermen and oyster farmers as a result of the oil slick under the next French single
programming document (SPD) on structural assistance in fisheries and aquaculture 2000-06, in accordance
with the FIFG implementing Regulation, Council Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999 of 17 December 1999
laying down the detailed rules and arrangements regarding Community structural assistance in the fisheries
sector (1).