WRITTEN QUESTION E-1357/00 by Jorge Hernández Mollar (PPE-DE) to the Commission. European Union arbitration in the controversy over designations of origin for Sherry and Montilla wines.
Date: 2000-05-04
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Union, commercial arbitration, common agricultural policy, designation of origin, trade dispute, wine

C 81 E/30

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

13.3.2001

The Union of Small Farmers believes that if the sector is to survive it can only be through the introduction
of specific income support arrangements for dried fruit and nuts producers under the budgets provided for
in the COM in fruit and vegetables. This proposal has already been put forward by the Fruit and Vegetable
Producers(cid:146) Platform.

Can the Commission state what action it intends to take to alleviate these farmers(cid:146) anxieties arising from its
proposals to alter the aid arrangements which have hitherto applied in this sector?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(13 June 2000)

The specific aid scheme for nuts of Title Ila of Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 of the Council of 18 May
1972 on the common organisation of the market in fruit and vegetables (1) was set up in 1989 in order to
improve nut productivity and competitiveness. The main element of this scheme was the improvement
plan, through which a producer organisation could benefit from financial support for a maximum of 10
years.

The support scheme has not been modified. The support was always intended to be temporary and
degressive, in order to shift financial responsibility onto the growers.

Additional support for the nut sector is available for nuts and locust beans, as for all other products in the
fruit and vegetable sector, through the operational fund scheme of Council Regulation (EC) No 2200/96 of
28 October 1996 on the common organisation of the market in fruit and vegetables (2) which provides
financial support for all fruit and vegetables marketed through producer organisations.

(1) OJ L 118, 20.5.1972.
(2) OJ L 297, 21.11.1996.

(2001/C 81 E/035)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1357/00

by Jorge HernÆndez Mollar (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(4 May 2000)

Subject: European Union arbitration in the controversy over designations of origin for Sherry and Montilla

wines

The marketing strategies for Sherry and Montilla wines in the United Kingdom have led to a confrontation
between the two Spanish designations of origin which will probably have to be settled before the courts.

In the light of this and similar situations, the Community agricultural sector has been wondering whether
such disputes might be settled through arbitration which could be set in motion by means of specific
mechanisms implemented within the framework of the common agricultural policy.

Can the Commission say whether the common agricultural policy (CAP) provides or could provide
arbitration mechanisms which would help to settle disputes between Community farmers, either from the
same country or from different countries, without them having to go before the courts?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(9 June 2000)

The Commission has no recent information on the confrontation to which the Honourable Member refers
between the Montilla-Moriles and Jerez-Xeres-Sherry designations of origin brought about by their
commercial strategies in the United Kingdom.

13.3.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 81 E/31

In the absence of detailed information permitting it to examine the actual situation in depth it cannot say
whether an arbitration mechanism for regulating such conflicts exists, and can therefore only ask him to
provide further information.

(2001/C 81 E/036)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1359/00

by Jorge HernÆndez Mollar (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(4 May 2000)

Subject: Grouping together of Ceuta and Melilla in the Eurostat index for the purposes of Objective 1

All regions with less than 75 % of Community GDP may be considered eligible for Objective 1.
In calculating the figures which determine whether a region qualifies for such status, the Spanish cities of
Ceuta and Melilla are generally grouped together as if they were a single economic, geographical or
administrative unit.

In fact, these two cities in North Africa do not constitute a unit in any of the above senses, and it does not
appear logical that they should be listed together in the context of the 75 % limit and included as such in
Objective 1.

Does the Commission take the view that the GDP of each of these Spanish cities should be listed separately
with a view to their inclusion among the Community regions eligible for assistance under Objective 1?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(16 June 2000)

Article 3 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on
the Structural Funds (1) stipulates that the regions covered by Objective 1 shall be level II regions of the
Nomenclature of Territorial Statistical Units (NUTS II) with a per capita gross domestic product (GDP),
measured in purchasing power parities and calculated on the basis of Community figures for the last
three years available on 26 March 1999, which is less than 75 % of the Community average.

Ceuta and Melilla form a single NUTS II region with a per capita GDP (using the figures mentioned in the
said Article 3) of 71,4 % of the Community average, and on that ground have Objective 1 eligibility for the
period 2000-2006.

(1) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.

(2001/C 81 E/037)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1360/00

by Rosa MiguØlez Ramos (PSE) to the Commission

Subject: High-speed rail link between Galicia and Madrid

(4 May 2000)

In its reply to my questions Nos H-0456/99 (1), (E-1438/99) and (E-1440/99) (2) concerning Galicia and
high-speed rail
in the
Community guidelines on the trans european networks, there are no plans for a high-speed link between
Galicia and Central Spain.

links, which I tabled in September 1999, the Commission acknowledged that,