WRITTEN QUESTION P-0354/01 by Rosa Miguélez Ramos (PSE) to the Commission. Moroccan fisheries agreement negotiations.
Date: 2001-02-06
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Morocco, fishing agreement, negotiation of an agreement (EU)

3.7.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 187 E/219

A banknote frontloading to the public could in effect lengthen the dual circulation period and could run
counter to the reasons that led to its shortening. Moreover, banknote frontloading to the public could
entail the risk of early circulation of the notes before 1 January 2002. This is why the Ministers of Finance
and the Commission have concurred with the European Central Bank(cid:146)s position not to frontload banknotes
to the public.

(2001/C 187 E/243)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0348/01

by Giuseppe Di Lello Finuoli (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(6 February 2001)

Subject: Contract awarded by the municipality of Messina for a tramway to be financed with European

funding

In its reply of 6 June 2000 to this Member(cid:146)s Question E-1243/00 (1) of 14 April 2000, the Commission
said it (cid:145)will decide on the financing of the project(cid:146), implying that the decision had yet to be taken.

According to local media, in October 2000 the President of the Region of Sicily, Mr Vincenzo Leanza,
publicly announced that the funding would be granted.

Can the Commission clarify whether any, and if so what, decisions have been taken regarding the
financing of the project for the tramway in question?

(1) OJ C 72 E, 6.3.2001, p. 30.

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(27 March 2001)

The Commission has not taken a formal decision on part-financing this project under the Structural Funds
because the Region of Sicily has not yet provided it with the information requested on the environmental
impact assessment.

(2001/C 187 E/244)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0354/01

by Rosa MiguØlez Ramos (PSE) to the Commission

(6 February 2001)

Subject: Moroccan fisheries agreement negotiations

I have been told at first hand from the highest level of the Moroccan Government that the round of talks
on signing a fresh fisheries agreement, which began last Thursday between the Commission and Moroccan
Government representatives broke off on Friday, with no date set for their resumption, when Mr Smidt,
the Commission(cid:146)s Director-General for Fisheries, announced that he was returning to Brussels for the
weekend.

This kind of behaviour, which makes a laughing-stock not only of Fisheries Commissioner Franz Fischler,
who is strongly in favour of the agreement, but also Commission President Romani Prodi himself, who
gave his word to the Moroccan authorities that the Commission would be fully committed to the
negotiations, would appear to suggest that Mr Smidt is not the best person to carry these talks into their
next round.

C 187 E/220

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.7.2001

Is Mr Fischler aware of these facts, and has he been in receipt of any protest on the part of the Spanish
Government in this connection?

The fishing fleet has now been forced to remain tied up for fourteen months. Does the Commission intend
to make changes in the negotiating team, so as enable an agreement to be concluded?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(28 February 2001)

The Commission agreed with the Moroccan authorities to hold a one-day meeting on 25 January 2001 in
order to continue the negotiations on a future fisheries agreement, the previous session having ended on
9 January 2001.

During this meeting, on 25 January 2001, some progress was made and the Moroccan side introduced
new proposals that the Commission needed to examine carefully. Therefore both parties agreed to have
another technical meeting the following week. This explains why the Commission officials returned to
Brussels.

The discussions remain open and both delegations are continuing their efforts to reduce the distance
between their respective positions on the key issues.

(2001/C 187 E/245)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0359/01

by Eryl McNally (PSE) to the Commission

(8 February 2001)

Subject: Cat and dog fur trade

Is the European Union aware that we may face an embarrassing situation recently revealed by undercover
investigators looking into the trade in cat and dog fur from Asia?

At one Asian showroom, the investigators documented life-size tigers made of dog fur (cid:145)groupee(cid:146) as the
Asian merchants call it. Asian representatives told the investigators who posed as businessmen that those
large statues are being sold to hotels and museums in Europe for USD 5 000 each.

Would our tourists be happy to hear that dog and cat fur is being used in our facilities? Would the
Commission please comment on whether it intends to halt this trade before it tarnishes our businesses and
tourism?

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(8 March 2001)

The Commission does not have at his stage precise official information nor any data on imports of cat and
dog furs into the Community.

On the question of whether the Commission intends to stop this trade, it should be recalled that trade
policy is only an outward projection of the internal policy of the EU. According to the information
available, no Member State prohibits the commercial use of such furs. This is why, at this stage, and in the
absence of an internal prohibition, the Commission does not intend to propose a prohibition of imports of
cat and dog furs which would be contestable as discriminatory and an obstacle to the principle of national
treatment.

Nevertheless,
in the light of public concern about the commercial exploitation of cat and dog furs,
including in international trade, the Commission will follow up this question in order to examine whether
it should propose measures at European level, taking into consideration the principle of subsidiarity, and
will report back to the Parliament on the matter.