WRITTEN QUESTION P-3496/00 by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission. Date labelling of photographic paper.
Date: 2000-11-06
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: consumer information, labelling, marketing, packaging, paper, photographic industry

6.6.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 163 E/141

(2001/C 163 E/157)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3496/00

by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission

(6 November 2000)

Subject: Date labelling of photographic paper

I am informed that photographic paper sold to amateur photographers who wish to make their own black
and white or colour prints does not carry a (cid:145)sell by(cid:146) or (cid:145)use by(cid:146) date, despite the fact that colour paper
(in particular) has a useful life of just 18 months.

Trading standards officers inform me that as manufacturers are not dating their paper voluntarily action
must be taken by the European Commission if a change is to be secured.

Will the Commission state whether it intends to assist consumers by requiring photographic paper to be
labelled accordingly?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(5 January 2001)

The Commission does not believe that a specific initiative under consumer protection policy can currently
be taken on the question raised by the Honourable Member, given the priorities of the Commission(cid:146)s work
programme and the principle of subsidiarity.

An initiative of this kind could be taken, if appropriate, by the Member States, provided that compliance
with the rules of the EC Treaty on freedom of movement was ensured.

(2001/C 163 E/158)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3498/00

by Jorge Moreira Da Silva (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject:

(cid:145)Western Landfill Utility(cid:146) (Aterro sanitÆrio do oeste)

(6 November 2000)

On 21 October I visited Cadaval, and met the local population, the (cid:145)Movement for Proper Information
about the Western Landfill Utility(cid:146) (MPI), and distinguished Portuguese technical specialists. As a result
I was able to verify the fact that Resioeste choice of site for the Western Landfill Utility respects neither
rational criteria, nor the local population, nor the environment. Not only because, compared with all the
other options, the site chosen is the most costly in economic and social terms, but also, and above all,
because it will cause the greatest environmental damage (particularly to the region(cid:146)s water resources).
I would add that the entire process has been plagued by appalling administrative obstructions on the part
of the Portuguese Government.

The MPI has lodged a timely complaint against the Portuguese Government, impeccably argued in both
technical and legal terms, with DG Regio and DG Env.

Since what is at stake is the proper use of Community funds (given that this landfill will be supported by
the Cohesion Funds), the conservation of the environment and the wellbeing of the local population, can
the Commission tell me:

1. What action (cid:129) which will have to be urgent, given that Resioeste has already begun work on carrying

out the landfill (cid:129) is it taking to ensure that Community law is respected?

2. What information was it supplied with by the Portuguese Government?