WRITTEN QUESTION E-0469/01 by Luis Berenguer Fuster (PSE) to the Commission. Use of cattle hides.
Date: 2001-02-21
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: animal skin, bovine spongiform encephalopathy, derogation from EU law, economic consequence, health control, leather industry, veterinary legislation

C 235 E/212

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

21.8.2001

(2001/C 235 E/247)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0467/01

by Ioannis Averoff (PPE-DE), Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE),
Antonios Trakatellis (PPE-DE) and Christos Folias (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(20 February 2001)

Subject: Protection of forests from fires and the Commission(cid:146)s future strategy in this area

Regulation (EEC) 2158/92 (1) on protection of the Community(cid:146)s forests against fire is due to expire in
2001. However, at the last meeting of the standing committee on forestry which was held in France, the
Commission notified the Member States that it intended to review this Regulation and that it was
examining the possibility of incorporating it in the new Council Regulation (EC) 1257/1999 (2) on support
for rural development.

This would mean approaching the problem of fires from an agricultural, rather than an environmental
point of view, and actions so far funded under Regulation (EEC) 2158/92 would no longer be eligible.

1. What stage has work reached on reviewing regulation (EEC) 2158/92, and, given its consequences,
what purpose will this serve?

2.
Given the importance of this Regulation for the Mediterranean countries, the European Parliament
has already pointed out that the budget for these matters should be increased. Does the Commission
intend to review the scheduled budget and increase it from € 50 million to € 77 million?

(1) OJ L 217, 31.7.1992, p. 3.
(2) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999, p. 80.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(30 March 2001)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Members to its answer to Written Question E-0247/01 by
Mr Alavanos (1).

(1) See p. 161.

(2001/C 235 E/248)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0469/01

by Luis Berenguer Fuster (PSE) to the Commission

(21 February 2001)

Subject: Use of cattle hides

The measures adopted with a view to combating bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) provide for the
mandatory incineration of animals that are infected or may be at risk from infection. This means of
disposal, whereby hides are not removed from the animals beforehand, may lead to supply-related
problems for certain industries, such as the shoe industry, which use these hides as a raw material.

In the Commission(cid:146)s view, could hides be removed from cattle prior to incineration for subsequent use by
industry?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(23 April 2001)

Current Community measures on bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) do not prohibit the removal of
cattle hides before disposal of the rest of the body, if the hides are destined for leather production, unless
they are derived from animals which are suspected of being infected or are infected by a transmissible
spongiform encephalopathy (TSE).

21.8.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 235 E/213

In particular, Article 5(4) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2777/2000 of 18 December 2000 adopting
exceptional support measures for the beef market (1) exempts hides from bovine animals aged more than
30 months and not subject to one of the approved BSE rapid tests, from being stained or destroyed,
provided that the hides are stored and treated separately from other hides in such a way that they can only
be used for leather production.

According to Commission Decision 98/272/EC of 23 April 1998 on epidemio-surveillance for transmis-
sible spongiform encephalopathies and amending Decision 94/474/EC (2) and to Decision 2000/764/EC of
29 November 2000 on the testing of bovine animals for the presence of bovine spongiform encephalo-
pathy and amending Decision 98/272/EC on epidemio-surveillance for transmissible spongiform encepha-
lopathies (3), all parts of the body, including the hide, of an animal which shows clinical signs giving rise to
a suspicion of a TSE, or of an animal examined by one of the approved BSE rapid tests, must be destroyed
if the diagnosis indicates the presence of TSEs or if the result of the test is positive.

(1) OJ L 321, 19.12.2000.
(2) OJ L 122, 24.4.1998, as last amended by Decision 2001/8/EC (OJ L 2, 5.1.2001).
(3) OJ L 305, 6.12.2000, as last amended by Decision 2001/8/EC (OJ L 2, 5.1.2001).

(2001/C 235 E/249)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0482/01

by Herbert B(cid:246)sch (PSE) to the Commission

(21 February 2001)

Subject: Directives on the publication of company accounts and fundamental rights

There is a debate in Austria about the directives on the publication of company accounts (Council
Directive 68/151/EEC (1) of 9 March 1968, Council Directive 78/660/EEC (2) of 25 June 1978 and Council
Directive 83/349/EEC (3) of 13 June 1983) and fundamental rights. The question at issue is whether these
directives still comply with today(cid:146)s requirements in terms of data protection and public security.

When the directives were adopted, there was a need to ensure transparency. Since then, however, data
protection considerations have become increasingly important and, consequently, the directives should be
reviewed to see whether they reflect current needs.

What is the Commission(cid:146)s view of the relationship between the directives on the publication of company
accounts and European fundamental rights?

(1) OJ L 65, 14.3.1968, p. 8.
(2) OJ L 222, 14.8.1978, p. 11.
(3) OJ L 193, 18.7.1983, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(23 April 2001)

The Directives on the publication of company accounts (1) require companies to publish their annual
accounts, but they do not require associates to disclose personal data. Only the emoluments of members of
the various bodies must be published, as a total figure for each category. Moreover, Member States may
authorise non-disclosure of this information if it enables the status an individual member of any of these
bodies to be identified (see Article 43(1), subparagraphs (12) and (13), of Directive 78/660/EEC).

The capital of the company is the ultimate safeguard for creditors. The disclosure obligation thus strikes
a balance between the legitimate interests of traders, who want to reduce their liability, and those of
creditors, who do not want to take any unwarranted risks.