WRITTEN QUESTION P-2971/00 by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Powers of the Commission in connection with the protection of dogs.
Date: 2000-09-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Germany, application of EU law, domestic animal

C 103 E/234

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.4.2001

If so, how does the cost of diesel influence the amounts granted as subsidies? What method of calculation
is used?

If not, does the Commission plan to take this factor into consideration in the next round of COM reforms?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(4 October 2000)

Changing the amount of direct aid granted to Community producers is a decision for the Council, on a
proposal from the Commission. The amount of these aids was recently fixed as part of the Berlin
agreements on Agenda 2000 and Parliament played the important role assigned to it by the Treaties in
these negotiations.

The Commission is fully aware of the influence of fuel prices on the final production costs of agriculture
and fishery products.

The Commission does not believe that current fuel prices justify renegotiation of the Berlin agreements or
the increase in direct aids that would result. It is following with interest the discussions taking place in a
great many Member States and will ensure that any accords reached conform to Community rules.

Changes in producers(cid:146) income has always been one of the criteria considered by the Commission when
drawing up its proposals. If it transpires that this change in our economic circumstances is structural
rather than cyclical, the increase in the cost of fuel will then be one of the factors taken into account.

(2001/C 103 E/274)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2971/00

by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(13 September 2000)

Subject: Powers of the Commission in connection with the protection of dogs

Following the undertaking given by Commissioner Byrne at the sitting of 6 September that he would
consider the matter and in the light of the attempt to set up a pet-passport scheme at European level, does
the Commission believe that it has the power to intervene with the German Government regarding the
proposed slaughter of large numbers of dogs,
it accepts that the German Government has been
insufficiently rigorous in discriminating between dogs which are genuinely dangerous and those that are
not? If not, will it indicate the legal basis on which it believes that the Commission(cid:146)s powers regarding pet-
passports is based.

if

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(13 October 2000)

The Commission informs the Honourable Member that it has submitted a proposal for a Regulation (1) to
the Council with a view, among other things, to introducing a Community passport for pet animals
moving with their owners within the Community. However, these passports are intended for veterinary
purposes and should be regarded more as health cards. They should serve to limit the spread of diseases
affecting public and animal health.

Consequently, compliance of the German regulations with Community law can only be assessed on the
basis of Articles 28 and 30 (ex Articles 30 and 36) of the EC Treaty, since the Commission takes the view
that, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, it is for the Member States to adopt appropriate
measures to protect the life of humans, provided such measures comply with the rules of the EC Treaty.

3.4.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 103 E/235

According to Article 28 of the EC Treaty, Member States may not adopt national measures which restrict
the movement of animals. However, Article 30 of the EC Treaty authorises the adoption of such measures
if they are justified on grounds of public morality and protection of the health and life of humans and
animals, etc.

Nevertheless, according to the Honourable Member(cid:146)s information, the German authorities will,
in this
instance, have to find a reasonable balance between protecting the life of humans and permitting the free
movement of animals. The Commission will have to assess whether this balance has been found on the
basis of draft law on protection against dangerous dogs recently communicated by the German authorities
in the framework of the notification procedure introduced in Directive 98/34/EC of the Parliament and of
the Council of 22 June 1998 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of
technical standards and regulations (2).

(1) COM(2000) 529 final.
(2) OJ L 204, 21.7.1998.

(2001/C 103 E/275)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2973/00

by Andre Brie (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(13 September 2000)

Subject: Use of European Social Fund monies for a German Federal Government youth work programme

in East Germany

In connection with a German Federal Government decision to make available DM 75 million for youth
work in East Germany ((cid:145)Work and Skills Initiative against Racism and Xenophobia(cid:146)), and in view of the fact
that the lion(cid:146)s share of that amount is made up of European Social Fund monies,

does the Commission have knowledge of:

(cid:129) the associated programme of measures,

(cid:129) the initiatives to be assisted and what they involve,

(cid:129) the criteria for allocating funding for individual measures and initiatives?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(5 October 2000)

Based on the Community support framework (CSF) for structural interventions in the German objective 1
regions and on the objective 3 single programming document, the Commission requested the German
authorities to use European social fund (ESF) assistance to be provided for the 2000-2006 planning period
for actions to combat racism and xenophobia in relation to the labour market.

Following this request
the German authorities are at present preparing ESF assisted actions to be
implemented under the above youth work programme in both the Eastern and Western parts of Germany
in three areas: the ESF mainstream policy field (cid:145)Society without exclusion(cid:146); the ESF mainstream policy field
(cid:145)Local capital for social purposes(cid:146); and the thematic field of action (cid:145)Combating racism and xenophobia in
relation to the labour market(cid:146) under the Community initiative programme (cid:145)EQUAL(cid:146).

The German authorities have let the Commission know that ESF assistance amounting to a maximum of
DM 25 million per annum is likely to be earmarked for action in these fields under the objective 1
operational programme (ESF) which has still to be agreed, and under the objective 3 single programming
document. Practical arrangements concerning action to be taken and criteria for allocating ESF-funding in
the three above-mentioned areas are being prepared by the German authorities.