WRITTEN QUESTION E-2590/00 by Isidoro Sánchez García (ELDR) to the Council. Council's expectations regarding the measures to be implemented in the outermost regions pursuant to Article 299(2) of the EC Treaty.
Date: 2000-09-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU regional policy, island region

3.4.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 103 E/191

The allegedly lower costs of the new electronic ballasts was put forward as the justification for the directive
and the resulting restructuring of the market.

What is the price of:

(cid:129) a magnetic ballast?

(cid:129) an electronic ballast?

Reply

(9 November 2000)

The impact of this Directive on small and medium-sized undertakings in the European Union has been
studied carefully.

This examination has revealed that:

(cid:129) high-yield ballasts are profitable in the long term as using them can save a great deal of energy; since
SMUs also light their premises with flourescent lighting they stand to make a net economic gain;

(cid:129) the proposed yield improvements are relatively easy to implement and long transition periods have
been provided for, which means that no manufacturer will be unduly disadvantaged by the
requirements set; it should be noted that this long adjustment period has been set specifically to
cater for the situation of small and medium-sized undertakings;

(cid:129) the Community(cid:146)s industry will be bolstered by implementing this Directive. The yield requirements
stipulated will create jobs, both for raw material production and for ballast production. Furthermore,
demand will increase for new machinery as well as for the conversion of existing machines. It should
also be noted that low-yield ballasts are in the main imported from third countries, so that the
Directive will increase the market share of Community manufacturers for a higher quality product.

As for the prices of the various types of ballast to which the Honourable Member refers, the Council does
not have the necessary information at its disposal to enable it to answer this question.

(2001/C 103 E/219)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2590/00

by Isidoro SÆnchez Garc(cid:237)a (ELDR) to the Council

(1 September 2000)

Subject: Council(cid:146)s expectations regarding the measures to be implemented in the outermost regions

pursuant to Article 299(2) of the EC Treaty

In line with the statements made by the President-in-Office, Mr Chirac, at Parliament(cid:146)s part-session in July,
in which he referred explicitly to the outermost regions when outlining the French Presidency(cid:146)s main lines
of action during the second half of 2000, what are the Council(cid:146)s expectations as regards the adoption of
measures to be applied to the outermost regions of the European Union pursuant to Article 299(2) of the
EC Treaty?

Reply

(9 November 2000)

On 14 March 2000 the Commission submitted a report on the measures it proposed for the implementa-
tion of Article 299(2) of the Treaty concerning the outermost regions of the European Union.

C 103 E/192

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.4.2001

This report was followed by a Commission work programme for the introduction of measures designed to
implement Article 299(2).

However, to date the Council has received no formal proposals from the Commission and, as a result, is
unable to give the Honourable Member a more precise answer to his question about the Council(cid:146)s
expectations as regards the adoption of special measures to implement Article 299(2).

(2001/C 103 E/220)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2591/00

by Isidoro SÆnchez Garc(cid:237)a (ELDR) to the Council

(1 September 2000)

Subject: Official mandate granted by the Council to the Commission to resolve the trade dispute over

bananas and taking account of (cid:145)remoteness(cid:146)

A number of options are being discussed as part of the debate which has been launched in the agriculture
and trade sector on reforming the COM for bananas so as to comply with the decisions of the WTO
dispute settlement panel from the point of view of trade, in which quotas and tariffs are combined.

What official mandate has the Council given to the Commission to enable it to negotiate and, if possible,
resolve the trade dispute with certain banana-exporting third countries stemming from the system for
importing bananas to the Community market? Has it taken account of the remoteness of banana-
producing regions in the Community, which are referred to in Article 299(2) of the EC Treaty?

Reply

(9 November 2000)

The Council has not given any (cid:145)official mandate(cid:146) for the Commission to negotiate in the banana dispute.

However, it should be remembered that the Council since spring 1999 has on a number of occasions
encouraged the Commission to hold talks with all parties concerned with a view to finding a solution to
the dispute.

At its meeting on 10 July 2000 the Council noted a report by the Commission on the talks it had held to
resolve the banana dispute and asked it to examine the possibility of managing the market using a (cid:145)first
come, first served(cid:146) quota system. It asked the Commission to report back after investigating the possible
solutions, including the tariff solution and its implications. The Council will take a decision when it has
seen that report.

At the same time the Council reiterated its concern that the banana dispute should be settled as soon as
possible having regard in particular for the interests of Community producers.