WRITTEN QUESTION E-2839/00 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Increase in open skies agreements between Member States and the US as a result of mergers between national airlines.
Date: 2000-09-08
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: United States, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, air traffic, bilateral agreement, civil aviation, common transport policy, merger, transport company

C 136 E/106

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

8.5.2001

However, the safeguard measures taken by the Member States must then be reviewed as soon as possible
by the Commission in the standing veterinary committee (SVC), where all Member States are represented.
In the framework of this committee, the suitability of the measures adopted is evaluated. If deemed
necessary, the Commission may submit to the SVC for its opinion draft decisions including safeguard
measures to be adopted at Community level. However, the Commission may also, under exceptional
circumstances, adopt disease control measures without a prior opinion of the SVC, on condition that these
measures are then reviewed by this committee as soon as possible. Whenever safeguard measures are taken
at Community level, the Member States must adapt their legislation accordingly. Following the outbreak of
classical swine fever (CSF) reported in the United Kingdom on 8 August 2000, the Dutch government
adopted on 10 August a number of disease control measures. Subsequently, the Commission adopted a
number of decisions concerning this outbreak. The Netherlands supported all draft decisions discussed in
the SVC, which included provisions on a ban on moving pigs from the areas of the United Kingdom
considered as CSF infected and some restrictions on movements of pigs from all or a large part of the
United Kingdom to other Member States. These restrictions included a 30 day standstill (quarantine) of all
pigs in the holding of origin before pigs are moved to other Member States.

Therefore, Community legislation did not prevent the Dutch government from taking interim measures to
prevent
the spread of disease in the Netherlands, although once the Commission adopted its own
decisions, the Dutch government had then to conform to these provisions.

2.
As just explained, the Commission has not sought to prevent the adoption of disease control
measures by the Member States. However, one of the objectives of the Commission is to ensure that,
including in case of an emergency, the measures taken by the Member States are in accordance with
Community legislation.

3.
The Community provisions and procedures on the measures that may be taken in an emergency
which poses a risk for public or animal health in relation to intra-Community trade of certain live animals
and products are aimed at providing a legal base for the adoption by the Member State and/or the
Commission of adequate protection measures in the shortest possible delay. These interim measures are
then reviewed as quickly as possible at Community level by a body of experts to ensure a consistent and
technically sound approach, taking also into consideration the need to avoid unnecessary restrictions on
trade.

Directive 90/425/EEC has shown itself to be a very effective tool for these purposes. Therefore, the
Commission cannot share the view of the Honourable Member on this matter.

As already explained above, the Member States can adopt quarantine measures to prevent the spread

4.
of animal diseases, in the framework of Directive 90/425/EEC.

The Commission cannot agree with the statement that this Directive has an adverse effect and it does not
intend to review its substance.

(1) OJ L 224, 18.8.1990.

(2001/C 136 E/121)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2839/00

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(8 September 2000)

Subject: Increase in (cid:145)open skies(cid:146) agreements between Member States and the US as a result of mergers

between national airlines

1.
Is the Commission aware of the possibility of the threat to merger talks between British Airways and
KLM from the American demand that, if the merger goes ahead, the United States and the United Kingdom
would have to conclude a liberal aviation agreement on the lines of the (cid:145)open skies(cid:146) model which already
exists for the Netherlands (source: De Volkskrant of 10 August 2000)?

8.5.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 136 E/107

Does the Commission agree that such (cid:145)open skies(cid:146) agreements prevent both the national governments
2.
of the Member States and the European Union from pursuing an active policy of curbing further
expansion in aviation and strengthening the competitive position of railways for transport over medium
distances of up to 2 000 km?

3. What action does the Commission intend to take to prevent a further increase in (cid:145)open skies(cid:146)
agreements?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(31 October 2000)

1.
The Commission is familiar with the position of the American administration as regards the KLM/
British Airways merger negotiations. As the Honourable Member will be aware, these negotiations have
been discontinued.

The Commission has made a proposal to the Council to establish a common position as regards the
2.
United States with the aim to conclude a transatlantic common aviation area (TCAA) between the
European economic area (EEA) and the United States. Clearly, individual open skies agreements substan-
tially hinder both the establishment of a common position and effective Community negotiations with the
United States.

It is noted that the competitive position of railways cannot be a major factor in the discussions on
transatlantic air transport links. A TCAA would however facilitate air and rail
intermodality for intra
European and intra American transport, particularly as regards high speed rail links.

3. With the adoption of the so-called (cid:145)third package(cid:146), the establishment of the internal air transport
market of the Community, the Commission takes the view that such agreements can only be concluded at
Community level. The Commission starts infringement proceedings (Article 226 of the EC Treaty (formerly
Article 169)) against every Member State that concludes or has concluded a bilateral air transport
arrangement with the United States after June 1992 (the adoption of the third package). For eight Member
States (Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Luxembourg, Austria, Finland, Sweden and the United Kingdom) this
procedure has now been completed. Because these Member States did not comply with the reasoned
opinion of the Commission, the Commission brought these eight Member States before the Court of
justice in 1998. Against France and the Netherlands an infringement procedure is still pending.

(2001/C 136 E/122)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2843/00

by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission

(4 September 2000)

Subject: Fine imposed on Greece

Following the recent landmark ruling by the European Court of Justice that Greece must pay a daily fine
for failure to comply with environmental legislation, will the Commission state how much Greece has paid
to date or when it is expected that Greece will make a first payment?

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

(16 October 2000)

In its judgment of 4 July 2000 (1) the Court of Justice required Greece to pay to the Commission(cid:146)s (cid:145)EC own
resources(cid:146) account a penalty payment of € 20 000 for each day(cid:146)s delay in taking the action needed in order
to comply with the Commission/Greece judgment of 7 April 1992, dating from the time when that
judgment was handed down, and continuing until that action has been taken.