WRITTEN QUESTION E-0913/00 by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Potentially dangerous developments on French farms.
Date: 2000-03-29
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: France, agricultural building, common agricultural policy, corporate finance, pollution from agricultural sources

C 26 E/130

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

26.1.2001

3.

Is it true that DG XI D 02 has commissioned an expert opinion on environmental issues relating to
the Avantis industrial estate, and that:

(a)

(b)

the expert who is to deliver it was given the assignment at the proposal of the above official,

the expert, who is regarded as objective, Professor Stubbe of Halle, is himself a member of NABU,
and has he made this clear?

4. Does the Commission agree that for an objection by NABU to be dealt with by a member of NABU
and assessed in the light of an expert opinion delivered by a member of NABU, who has been given
the proposal of a member of NABU, does not constitute an impartial and
the assignment at
transparent procedure?

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

(18 April 2000)

The Honourable Member(cid:146)s first question relates to German law. The Commission does not have the

1.
authority to answer it.

2.
The Commission would recall that all European citizens have the fundamental right to join any
association or to belong to any religion of their choice. That freedom also applies to European officials,
inasmuch as the rules of the Staff Regulations for officials of the European Communities guarantee that
they perform their duties impartially, independently, objectively and competently. The Commission there-
fore does not have to know to which organisations its officials belong. The Commission would stress that
its decisions are the result of a collective assessment involving several departments and hierarchical levels.
It therefore has no reason to doubt the integrity and impartiality of the official referred to by the
Honourable Member.

3.
In choosing an expert to formulate a scientific opinion on the Avantis case, the Commission sought
a person who had recognised expertise on hamsters, was a university professor, had an excellent
knowledge of German and/or Dutch, and was not involved in the regional debate surrounding the Avantis
project. The Commission chose Professor Stubbe on the basis of these four criteria, which are reflected in
the study contract referred to by the Honourable Member.

The Commission will question the professor about any activities within the NABU. It believes a large
number of professors of biology and ecology are members of the principal nature conservation associa-
tions in their respective Member States.

On the basis of the information available to the Commission, in view of the freedom of European
4.
citizens to join the associations of their choice and given the internal procedures for the control and
assessment of the information which it receives, the Commission does not believe that there was any
conflict of interest in the procedure for the study of the Avantis case.

The Commission has not yet considered Professor Stubbe(cid:146)s report. It has not adopted a position on the
complaint concerned and has not considered which points it feels should be taken into consideration.

(2001/C 26 E/161)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0913/00

by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(29 March 2000)

Subject: Potentially dangerous developments on French farms

Since 1994 the French agriculture ministry has been making considerable efforts to harmonise agricultural
installations (livestock housing, slurry pits etc.). These installations are built to low-level specifications and
are of inadequate quality, and have the potential to cause considerable environmental damage. In the
foreseeable future these structures, which can no longer be restored, are in danger of collapsing. They are

26.1.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 26 E/131

consequently both an environmental and a financial liability. To date 50 % of French agricultural holdings
have already applied the standards laid down by the government, even though these seem to be contrary
to EU law.

Is the Commission aware of this problem, and does it plan to take measures to clarify the situation?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(11 May 2000)

Since introduction of the rural development strand of Agenda 2000 (July 1999) support for investment on
agricultural holdings in the Community, and therefore in France, is restricted to those complying with
minimum standards regarding the environment, hygiene and animal welfare (Article 5 of Council
Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 of 17 May 1999 on support for rural development from the European
Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) and amending and repealing certain Regulations (1)).

The standards embrace the Community rules and any complementary national provisions. Compliance
with them is checked and non-compliance debars from Community aid.

(1) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999.

(2001/C 26 E/162)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0917/00

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Council

(24 March 2000)

Subject: Qualified majority voting

Can the Council state on how many occasions each year for the last five years each Member State has been
outvoted in the Council when a decision on a legislative proposal (directive, regulation, decision) has been
taken by qualified majority voting?

Reply

(26 June 2000)

The Honourable Member will
delegations on the adoption of legislative acts by the Council.

find below a summary of the abstentions and votes against cast by

It should be noted that this information was compiled from the monthly summaries of the Council(cid:146)s
activities drawn up and published by the Council General Secretariat.

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000 (1)

B

1

1

3

0

1

DK

0

1

1

0

0

D

4

2

7

1

0

EL

0

0

2

0

0

E

0

1

7

2

0

(1)

First two months.

Abstentions:

F

1

3

2

0

0

IRL

IT

0

1

0

0

0

1

1

5

1

1

L

2

1

2

0

0

NL

2

0

1

1

0

A

1

1

0

0

0

P

2

2

4

1

0

FIN

0

0

0

0

0

S

0

0

0

0

0

UK

0

3

0

3

0