WRITTEN QUESTION P-0755/01 by Albert Maat (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Financing of a school fruit programme.
Date: 2001-03-07
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU action, EU financing, food hygiene, fruit, health education, nutrition, public awareness campaign

C 261 E/190

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.9.2001

(2001/C 261 E/215)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0754/01

by Pasqualina Napoletano (PSE) to the Commission

(7 March 2001)

Subject: Lazio Region(cid:146)s Leader+ programme

Lazio Region(cid:146)s Leader+ programme for the period from 2000-2006 has been submitted to the Commi-
ssion, which has declared it inadmissible. Can the Commission explain why it has done so and say what
guidelines it has given to enable the document to be redrafted in accordance with the criteria governing
the initiative, thus ensuring that the economic players and communities concerned suffer no further
disadvantages?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(3 April 2001)

The Honourable Member(cid:146)s question relates to the admissibility of the Lazio Region Leader+ programme.

On 16 November 2000 the Italian Permanent Representative submitted the Lazio Region programme
under the Leader+ Community Initiative, in accordance with Article 21(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1260/
1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds (the general Regulation) (1) and with point 42
of the Commission notice laying down guidelines for the Leader+ Community Initiative (2).

Article 28 of the general Regulation and point 35 of the Leader+ notice state that the Commission is to
approve Leader+ programmes within not more than five months of the date of receipt, provided that all
the requirements which the general Regulation and the notice stipulate have been met.

On carrying out a basic overall check after receiving notification of
the Lazio Region(cid:146)s Leader+
programme, the Commission found significant deficiencies and a lack of information with regard to
several relevant provisions of the notice.

On 14 December 2000 the Commission accordingly wrote to the Italian Permanent Representative, stating
that the programme was inadmissible and asking the Italian authorities to meet the regulatory require-
ments by incorporating into the proposed programme all the information required for it to deem this
programme admissible as soon as possible.

(1) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.
(2) OJ C 139, 18.5.2000.

(2001/C 261 E/216)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0755/01

by Albert Maat (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(7 March 2001)

Subject: Financing of a school fruit programme

The Netherlands parliament has asked the country(cid:146)s ministers for public health and agriculture to draw up
a programme for supplying fruit to primary schools. The intention is to get children into the habit of
eating fruit from an early age so that it stays with them for life.

18.9.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 261 E/191

In view of the provisions of Regulation (EC) 2826/2000 (1) on information and promotion actions for
agricultural products on the internal market, school fruit programmes could be included amongst actions
focusing on nutritional and health aspects. Does the Commission consider that school fruit comes within
the scope of this definition?

Is it prepared to release money for the school fruit programme under the support scheme for promotional
measures?

(1) OJ L 328, 23.12.2000, p. 2.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(20 April 2001)

The Commission would remind the Honourable Member that under Article 3 of Council Regulation (EC)
No 2826/2000 of 19 December 2000 on information and promotion actions for agricultural products on
the internal market (1), the sectors or products which can be the subject of information or promotion
inter alia, the desirability of drawing attention to the
measures are determined taking into account,
nutritional and health value of
thematic or target-specific
campaigns.

the products in question, by means of

The desirability of Community measures in favour of
fruit consumption in schools will shortly be
discussed in connection with the detailed rules for applying that Regulation, which are to be adopted by
the Commission in accordance with the management committee procedure.

The Commission will keep the Honourable Member informed of the outcome of these discussions.

(1) OJ L 328, 23.12.2000.

(2001/C 261 E/217)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0758/01

by Werner Langen (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(7 March 2001)

Subject: EU slaughtering programme to alleviate the beef market

As part of the EU programme to support the beef market, 400 000 cattle over 30 months old are to be
purchased, slaughtered and incinerated in Germany, including 12 000 in the Rhineland-Palatinate. 314
German abattoirs can apply for the tender to slaughter published by the Federal Ministry for Consumer
Protection, Agriculture and Food in the Federal Gazette if they are in a position to slaughter 40 cows per
hour. The (cid:145)stringent conditions(cid:146) in the EU regulation are said to be the reason for this. According to one of
the largest abbatoirs in the Rhineland-Palatinate it is not possible to slaughter 40 cows per hour because of
the delay caused by the brain samples that need to be taken for BSE testing. The result would therefore be
cattle having to be transported to abattoirs capable of providing the appropriate capacity. However,
transport costs for farmers and needlessly long transport times for livestock are supposed to be avoided.

The Commission is therefore asked to indicate:

1. What exact form do the (cid:145)stringent conditions(cid:146) take that result in 40 cows needing to be slaughtered

per hour and how restrictively are these conditions implemented?

2. How does it justify these conditions and does it regard them as indispensable in the light of the above

difficulties?

3. What scope does it see for counteracting specific problems of implementation?