WRITTEN QUESTION E-0547/01 by Wilhelm Piecyk (PSE) to the Commission. Dues payable by pleasure and recreational craft on entry into Greek waters.
Date: 2001-02-27
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Greece, charge having equivalent effect, common ports policy, infringement of EU law, pleasure craft, ports policy, territorial waters

21.8.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 235 E/225

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(23 April 2001)

It is the policy of the Commission that measures relating to public health should be science based. The
Scientific Steering Committee, in its opinion of 12 January 2001 on the safety with regard to bovine
spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) of certain bovine tissues and certain animal-derived products, indicated
its view that the vertebral column of bovines over 12 months should be regarded as specified risk material
(SRM). Furthermore it indicated that in assessing the risk to human health posed by the bovine vertebral
column, account should be taken of the likelihood of animals being infected and it made particular
reference to the existence of an effective feed ban. Following this opinion and the conclusion of the
Agriculture Council of 29 January 2001, the Commission brought forward a proposal (1) to the Standing
Veterinary Committee of 7 February 2001 adding vertebral column to the list of SRMs, but taking account
of the effective feed bans in the United Kingdom and Portugal and the low geographical BSE risk status of
Austria, Finland and Sweden.

It is the view of the Commission that the protection of public health must take precedence over the
protection of traditional products. Also, it should be noted that the Decision (1) contains a provision that
allows any Member State to apply for a derogation from the rules regarding removal of vertebral column if
they can demonstrate compliance with certain criteria.

(1)

JO L 84, 23.3.2001.

(2001/C 235 E/263)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0547/01

by Wilhelm Piecyk (PSE) to the Commission

(27 February 2001)

Subject: Dues payable by pleasure and recreational craft on entry into Greek waters

In answer to Written Question E-1062/00 (1) by Mr von Wogau, the Commission indicated on 6 June
2000 that it would examine in greater detail the questionable legality under Community rules of dues on
entry.

The Commission undertook to contact the Greek authorities and any other bodies necessary to clear up
the situation and obtain all relevant further information and, if necessary, to proceed under Article 226.

In view of this:

1. What additional information has the Commission obtained to date?

2. What conclusions has the Commission arrived at in the light of information obtained concerning the

legality under Community rules of dues on entry?

3. What are the Commission(cid:146)s reasons for its conclusions? Has it already initiated proceedings under

Article 226 or does it intend to do so in the foreseeable future?

(1) OJ C 26 E, 26.1.2001, p. 150.

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(19 April 2001)

On 12 September 2000, the Commission sent Greece a letter of formal notice concerning the traffic
charges referred to by the Honourable Member. The Greek authorities(cid:146) reply on 20 November 2000 was
unsatisfactory. Greece does not intend to abolish the charges; its arguments to the effect that they comply
with Community legal requirements are unconvincing.

C 235 E/226

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

21.8.2001

Consequently, the charges in question do appear to be taxes with equivalent effect to customs duties on
import, which are incompatible with Articles 23, 25 and 133 of the EC Treaty (formerly Articles 9, 12 and
113), and the Commission intends to continue the proceedings initiated against Greece.

(2001/C 235 E/264)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0550/01

by Dirk Sterckx (ELDR) to the Commission

(19 February 2001)

Subject: Impounding of Belgian ham in Portugal in the wake of the dioxin crisis

In 1999, the Portuguese authorities impounded a number of deliveries of ham from a Flemish company
which bore a date which gave grounds for suspecting that they might be contaminated with dioxin.
Similar products held in stock from the same period were tested and analysed for dioxin contamination.
Unlike the authorities in other countries, the Portuguese authorities have never adopted the method of
testing samples. In the interim, the goods have been declared unfit for human consumption and actually
had to be destroyed. The company involved is not eligible for the aid made available in Belgium for the
destruction of products from the suspect period because the final date for applications for such aid has
passed.

Is the Commission aware of the attitude of the Portuguese authorities to the Belgian method of testing and
analysing samples? Is it acceptable that, because of the attitude of the Portuguese authorities, the products
have now been declared unfit for human consumption and the company involved can no longer destroy
them and claim the aid made available in Belgium for the destruction of products from the suspect period?
How many complaints has the Commission received to date about measures taken by Member States
against Belgian products in the wake of the dioxin crisis?

Supplementary answer
given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(29 March 2001)

The Commission has been informed on a number of occasions about a persistent problem with batches of
animal foodstuffs originating from Belgium which were delivered to Portugal during the dioxin crisis. The
Member States concerned also drew attention to this problem at the meeting of the Standing Veterinary
Committee on 4 April 2000. As can be seen from the report of this meeting published on the Internet (1),
the Commission was unable to find a solution to this problem and has urged the two parties to reach
a compromise. Even though this matter arose in connection with the implementation of Community
measures taken during the dioxin crisis, it is in fact a trade dispute between two private companies. Both
of
the Member States involved have defended their national undertakings by attaching a different
interpretation to the sampling required in order to settle the dispute.

To date, the Commission has received 166 complaints about measures taken by Member States against
Belgian products in the wake of the dioxin crisis.

(1) http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/fs/rc/svc/index_en.html.

(2001/C 235 E/265)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0571/01

by Gabriele Stauner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(20 February 2001)

Subject: Communication of confidential information by the Commission

Article 197 of the EC Treaty constitutes the legal basis for controls on the Commission by the European
Parliament and its Members. If necessary, this covers the communication of confidential information by the
Commission.