WRITTEN QUESTION E-1483/00 by Paul Rübig (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Reduction of ecopoint quotas.
Date: 2000-05-11
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Austria, commercial vehicle, common transport policy, tradeable emission permit

6.3.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 72 E/63

Can the Commission state whether it is correct that there is not sufficient information available to assess
whether it is acceptable in health terms to add glucuronolactone, taurine and caffeine to (cid:145)energy drinks(cid:146)?
Can it also state whether the (cid:145)Red Bull(cid:146) case has been shelved as a result of the conclusion reached by its
Scientific Committee on Food?

In case of doubt as to whether the abovementioned additives in the (cid:145)energy drink(cid:146) are acceptable in health
terms, will it then explain why (cid:145)Red Bull(cid:146) is still to be found on the market alongside other beverages?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(26 July 2000)

The Honourable Member is referred to the reply the Commission gave to Oral Question H-323/00 by
Mr Cashman during question time at Parliament(cid:146)s April 2000 part-session (1) on the same subject. In
addition it should be clarified that the Commission has for the time being decided to postpone the
infringement proceedings.

(1) Debates of the European Parliament (April 2000).

(2001/C 72 E/074)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1483/00

by Paul R(cid:252)big (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(11 May 2000)

Subject: Reduction of ecopoint quotas

In the transit agreement between Austria and the EU the number of transit authorisations is governed by
ecopoints. Besides an automatic annual reduction of these ecopoints, the arrangement also provides for a
quota reduction this year because low-emission vehicles enabled more journeys to be undertaken last year.
After the economic trend in 1999 led to heavier demand for transport through Austria than provided for
in the transit agreement, an additional and thus disproportionate reduction of the ecopoint quota is likely
this year.

Experience shows that the number of ecopoints issued is not enough to ensure that the whole of the
European business sector is supplied. This situation is further exacerbated by the fact that this year a
disproportionately high reduction is having an impact.

Is the Commission aware that a shortage of transit authorisations,
current economic upturn in Europe?

i.e. ecopoints, may jeopardise the

What does the Commission intend to do in this context to ensure that the European business sector is
supplied?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(19 June 2000)

The Commission is obliged under Article 11(2)(c) of Protocol No 9 of the Act of Accession of Austria (1) to
make a proposal to reduce the total number of ecopoints available if the number of transit journeys by
lorries through Austria exceeds the 1991 level by more than 8 %. In 1999 the number of journeys
exceeded the 1991 level by almost 15 %.

The methodology for calculating the required reduction in ecopoints is clearly laid out in Protocol No 9
and is equivalent to some 300 000 transit journeys. In order to minimise its effect as much as possible, the
Commission is seeking to spread the reduction over the remaining 3‰ year life of the ecopoint system. By
spreading the reduction in this way the reduced possibilities for lorries to transit the Alps via Austria can

C 72 E/64

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

6.3.2001

In this regard the Commission notes that Germany, Austria and Italy are
be met by the railways.
committed to working together to improve north-south running rail freight services through the rail
freight freeways.

In addition, the consequences of a reduced number of ecopoints will, from 2001, be offset in part by the
increased possibilities for lorries to transit the Alps via Switzerland as a result of the coming into force of
the transport agreement with Switzerland.

The proposal for a Commission regulation was submitted to the management committee for road, rail and
combined transport in Austria on 31 May 2000. A vote was taken but there was not the necessary
majority in favour of the proposal for its adoption. Thus, in conformity with the rules of procedure laid
down in Article 16 of Protocol No 9, the proposal has been referred to the Council for consideration.

(1) OJ C 241, 29.8.1994.

(2001/C 72 E/075)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1484/00

by Paul R(cid:252)big (PPE-DE) to the Council

(12 May 2000)

Subject: Competence of European Court of Justice in relation to Article 7 of the EU Treaty

Even although the current (cid:145)bilateral measures(cid:146) by Austria(cid:146)s 14 EU partner states in reaction to the accession
to power of the Austrian (cid:214)VP/FP(cid:214) (Austrian People(cid:146)s Party/Freedom Party of Austria) Federal Government
do not constitute a case to which Article 7 of the EU Treaty would apply, the provisions of Articles 6 and 7
of the EU Treaty nevertheless have a direct bearing on the legal and political debate on the admissibility
and fitness of purpose of those measures.

A comparison of the procedural provisions of Article 7 of the EU Treaty with the provisions governing the
exercise of powers laid down in Article 46 of the EU Treaty reveals that a decision resulting in a
determination by the Council pursuant to Article 7(1) of the EU Treaty is not subject to review by the
European Court of Justice. This means that any Member State against which any such determination is
made will, in particular, be denied the right to seek redress before the Court for a possible violation of its
right to a hearing as guaranteed by Article 7(1) of the EU Treaty.

How does the Council assess this situation, having regard to the principle of the rule of law enshrined in
Article 6(1) of the EU Treaty as one of the fundamental principles of the Union?

Does the Council see both a need and an opportunity to make good this deficiency of compliance with the
rule of law in the course of the current Inter-Governmental Conference on the amendment of the Treaties?

Reply

(18/19 September 2000)

The question put by the Honourable Member refers to a possible amendment of the Treaty on European
Union. It should be noted that the revision of the treaties falls within the competence of the Intergovern-
mental Conference, not of the Council.

As regards the Treaty establishing the European Community, the Council would draw the Honourable
Member(cid:146)s attention to Article 309.