WRITTEN QUESTION E-0021/01 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Twelfth extraordinary meeting of the ICCAT.
Date: 2001-01-17
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Atlantic Ocean, Bermuda, United Kingdom, fishery management, international organisation, overseas countries and territories, sea fish, the EU's international role

C 187 E/160

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.7.2001

(2001/C 187 E/171)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0021/01

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Twelfth extraordinary meeting of the ICCAT

(17 January 2001)

that, at

With due respect for the right of Member States to enjoy dual representation within regional fisheries
organisations both as Member States of the European Community and as contracting parties to the
relevant regional fisheries organisation representing particular overseas territories,
it was nevertheless
apparent
the ICCAT held in Marrakech from 13 to
20 November 2000, members of the United Kingdom delegation were taking part simultaneously in
Community co-ordination meetings and meetings of the ICCAT contracting parties, representing Bermuda.
This dual role enabled the United Kingdom representative to take part in internal meetings to coordinate
Community interests, while at the same time defending positions opposed to EU interests on behalf of
Bermuda.

the twelfth extraordinary meeting of

In the light of this situation, what measures has the Commission taken, or will it take, to prevent such
occurencies at future meetings of the ICCAT or other regional fisheries organisations?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(16 February 2001)

The question of how to represent the specific interests of the overseas territories of certain Member States
was the subject of a separate declaration attached to the European Union Treaty.

This declaration stipulates that there should not be any divergence between the interests of the Union and
those of overseas countries or territories unless there are exceptional circumstances. In such circumstances,
the Council should endeavour to find a solution which corresponds to the Union(cid:146)s position. However in
cases where this proves impossible,
it has been agreed that the Member State concerned could act
separately in the interests of such countries or territories provided that this does not undermine the
interests of the Community.

The Member State must inform the Council and the Commission when such a conflict of interests is likely
to come about and, if separate action is unavoidable, it should indicate clearly that it is acting in the
interest of such a territory mentioned above.

The coordination of the opposing positions should take place within the appropriate Council bodies, the
coordination meetings sometimes being held alongside sessions of regional fisheries organisations. The
Member States are responsible for the composition of their delegation within the Council bodies under the
responsibility of the Presidency. The Commission has, according to its role as guardian of the Treaty, a duty
to verify that the Member States correctly inform it, as well as the Council, of the positions they intend to
present on behalf of their overseas territories.

(2001/C 187 E/172)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0024/01

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Suspension of customs tariffs on tuna loin

(17 January 2001)

Last year the Commission submitted to the Council a proposal on the common organisation of the market
in the fisheries sector in which it advocated suspending the customs tariffs on tuna loin. This proposal was
opposed by the Community(cid:146)s tuna loin producing sector, as well as by certain Member States, with the
result that the Council reached agreement on the basis of the views set out in an independent report