WRITTEN QUESTION E-1260/00 by Alexander de Roo (Verts/ALE) and Marie Isler Béguin (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Expulsion of bears from the French Pyrenees.
Date: 2000-04-19
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: France, Midi-Pyrenées, infringement of EU law, wild mammal

C 53 E/114

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.2.2001

As regards the specific example of the medical product Xenical produced by Roche Laboratories: where
this is a medical product whose marketing authorisation has been granted via the centralised procedure,
i.e. by the Commission, after receiving the opinion of the Scientific Committee advising the European
Agency for the Evaluation of Medical Product, the Commission will examine the problem raised with the
holder of
the marketing authorisation and with the Dutch authorities responsible for supervising
advertising on their national territory. The holder of the marketing authorisation is, indeed, responsible
for the advertising applying to those medical products for which he has obtained the marketing permit.

If it should emerge that there has been an infringement of Directive 92/28/EEC, the Commission will take
the action needed.

(1) Council Directive 92/28/EEC of 13 March 1992 on the advertising of medicinal products for human use (OJ L 113,

30.4.1992).

(2001/C 53 E/144)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1260/00

by Alexander de Roo (Verts/ALE)
and Marie Isler BØguin (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(19 April 2000)

Subject: Expulsion of bears from the French Pyrenees

In late March 2000 the French parliament decided that brown bears in the (French) Pyrenees should be
forced to move home. In 1996 a number of brown bears from Slovenia were specially imported to
strengthen and inject new life into the population of brown bears in the Pyrenees which faced extinction.

Does the Commission agree that capturing these brown bears and forcibly removing them to Slovenia or
to zoos is a infringement of the habitats directive?

If so, what action does the Commission intend to take to induce the French authorities to abandon the
forcible relocation of bears?

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

(9 June 2000)

The Honourable Member refers to an amendment adopted at first reading by the French National
Assembly. To date, the Commission has not been informed of any final decision by the French authorities
to capture bears reintroduced to the central Pyrenees or their cubs.

If France does decide to capture the bears,
it must abide by the provisions of Article 16 of Council
Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and
flora (1) (cid:129) the Habitats Directive. The Commission has not been informed of any decision by Slovenia to
accept bears relocated from the Pyrenees.

The Commission hopes that the LIFE-Nature project under way in the Pyrenees will be able to continue
with bears reintroduced to or born in these mountains, where until recently they occurred naturally.

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

(2001/C 53 E/145)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1263/00

by Lord Inglewood (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(11 April 2000)

Subject: Chinese accession to the WTO

Could the Commission state what, on the basis of its present negotiating position, will be the likely
budgetary implications in terms of customs tariff revenues and agricultural levies on the one hand, and
including projections for agricultural export refunds and any other relevant impacts on
expenditure,