WRITTEN QUESTION P-0730/00 by Massimo Carraro (PSE) to the Commission. Provisions in support of poultry breeders affected by avian influenza.
Date: 2000-03-06
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Emilia-Romagna, Friuli-Venezia Giulia, Italy, Lombardy, Sardinia, Veneto, animal plague, common agricultural policy, market support, poultry, slaughter of animals

26.1.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 26 E/99

What progress has the Commission made in dealing with this case, and what measures can it take?

What penalties can the Commission impose if Sweden continues to apply Directives 85/337/EC and 97/
11/EC on environmental impact assessments in an incorrect manner?

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40.
(2) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997, p. 5.

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

(13 April 2000)

In response to this complaint, the Commission is conducting an investigation in order to assess whether
the relevant Community environmental legislation has been complied with. The investigation concerns the
impact assessment
allegations made by the complainant relating to the content of the environmental
carried out and the information which has been provided to the public. As further information is required,
the Commission has requested the observations of the Swedish authorities on this matter.

The Commission has no competence to issue any sanctions against Member States for infringements of
Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and
private projects on the environment as amended by Directive 97/11/EC. Without prejudging its assessment
of the case in question, the Commission may open infringement proceedings against a Member State for
violation of Community law (1). If a Member State does not take the necessary measures to comply with a
judgment of the Court of justice in such a case, the Commission shall after giving that Member State the
opportunity to submit its observations,
issue a reasoned opinion specifying the points on which the
Member State concerned has not complied with the judgment. If the Member State fails to take the
necessary measures to comply with the judgment within the time-limit laid down by the Commission, the
latter may bring the case before the Court again. In so doing, it shall specify the amount of the lump sum
or penalty payment to be paid by the Member State concerned. If the Court finds that the Member State
has not complied with its judgment it may impose a lump sum or penalty payment (2).

(1) Article 226 EC Treaty (ex-Article 169).
(2) Article 228 EC Treaty (ex-Article 171).

(2001/C 26 E/119)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0730/00

by Massimo Carraro (PSE) to the Commission

(6 March 2000)

Subject: Provisions in support of poultry breeders affected by avian influenza

In December 1999 poultry farms in a number of regions of Italy, including Lombardy, Friuli, Sardinia,
Emilia Romagna and, in particular, the Veneto, were hit by the spread of (cid:145)avian influenza(cid:146).

In compliance with Italian and Community legislation there was an immediate response to the European
Reference Centre(cid:146)s announcement that the virus was particularly virulent and measures were adopted to
contain and eradicate the epidemic. This resulted in the destruction of all birds on the infected farms and
the demarcation of protection and surveillance areas.

It is estimated that avian influenza has led to the deaths of more than 5 million chickens and laying hens,
which is having enormous repercussions, both social and economic. The damage has affected not only the
infected farms, which have lost income for every bird killed, but has involved the whole poultry sector,
with negative repercussions on exports to international markets.

C 26 E/100

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

26.1.2001

During the meeting of the Council of Agriculture Ministers held on 24 January last, the Italian Minister for
Agriculture and Forestry explained to the other ministers the problems the disease is causing the farms
involved. The meeting also offered an opportunity to consider a number of measures aimed at
compensating producers for the indirect damage caused by the epidemic.

The Italian Minister Mr De Castro therefore asked Commissioner Fischler to launch the procedure for
drawing up support measures for the Italian market in accordance with the provisions of Article 14 of
Regulation (EEC) No 2777/75 (1).

Can the Commission therefore say what stage has been reached in the procedure, what measures will be
adopted to compensate the producers so adversely affected and by what deadline they will be implemen-
ted, in view of the urgent need to respond to the poultry sector(cid:146)s problems?

(1) OJ L 282, 1.11.1975, p. 77.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(5 April 2000)

The Commission is following with concern the evolution of avian influenza in Italy. From mid December
1999 until 3 March 2000, more than 15 million birds were lost due to this epidemic and in the most
affected areas in Northern Italy a policy of complete stamping out is now being followed.

Regarding exceptional market support measures in addition to measures taken in conformity with
Community veterinary legislation, the Commission undertook to make an economic assessment on the
basis of detailed information to be supplied by the Italian ministry of Agriculture.

This assessment is necessary since Article 14 of Regulation (EEC) no 2771/75 on the common organisa-
tion of the market in poultrymeat provides that exceptional measures (cid:145)may be taken only to the extent that
and for such period as is strictly necessary for the support of that market(cid:146).

By 9 March 2000 the detailed information requested had not been made available. The evaluation
procedure which has to take account of the above mentioned stamping out policy could therefore not
have been started by that date.

(2001/C 26 E/120)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0737/00

by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(17 March 2000)

Subject: Removal of postal subsidies for Christian publications in Southern India

In the first two weeks of January this year, over 100 Christian publications in Southern India had their
postal subsidies removed on the grounds that the information which they are disseminating does not cover
political or current affairs and therefore does not constitute news. As a result of this action, many of these
publications, some of which have existed for thirty years with no previous problems of this kind, are at
risk of closing down permanently.

In the light of the ongoing climate of hostility towards the Christian community in India and the spate of
recent legislative initiatives to clamp down on their practice and witness, there are reasonable grounds to
believe that this latest step may be a deliberate attempt to curtail their freedom of expression.

Will the Commission seek to establish whether this move constitutes discrimination on religious grounds
and, if so, raise this matter with the Indian Government?