WRITTEN QUESTION E-1407/01 by Lord Inglewood (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Effects of foot-and-mouth disease on the use of EU funding.
Date: 2001-05-11
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: aid to agriculture, aid to undertakings, foot-and-mouth disease, product diversification

C 364 E/104

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.12.2001

economic, technical and policy feasibility of conservation options for biodiversity.(cid:146) The work described in
the question might be adapted to fall into the scope of this call, bearing in mind that the main evaluation
criterion is scientific excellence.

Details on the work programme for these different Specific Programmes and on funding conditions are
available on the Cordis website at the following address: http://www.cordis.lu/eesd/.

The financial instrument for the environment (LIFE) is not applicable because this is not an instrument for
the support of projects mainly dedicated to research. Further details (scope, financial issues, etc.) are on the
the Commission/Directorate general Environment: http:/europa.eu.int/comm/life/
LIFE homepage of
home.htm.

(2001/C 364 E/114)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1407/01

by Lord Inglewood (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(11 May 2001)

Subject: Effects of foot-and-mouth disease on the use of EU funding

Will the European Commission allow European money which is allocated for diversification to be used for
the re-establishment of businesses which have been severely affected by the consequences of foot-and-
mouth disease?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(19 July 2001)

The financial resources available for diversification purposes under the terms of Council Regulation (EC)
No 1257/1999 of 17 May 1999 on support for rural development from the European Agricultural
Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) and amending and repealing certain Regulations (1), fall under two
measures:

(cid:129) Investment in agricultural holdings (Article 4), and

(cid:129) diversification of agricultural activities and activities close to agriculture to provide multiple activities

or alternative incomes (Article 33).

The financial allocation to these two measures has been a matter for Member States in the preparation of
their Rural Development Programmes and, where applicable in their structural fund programmes under
Objective 1 and Objective 2. Furthermore, subject to the requirements set out in Regulation (EC) No 1257/
1999, the details and types of support provided are different for each programme as these are based on
the respective national or regional circumstances and priorities. Member States have a substantial degree of
flexibility to modify these programmes taking account of recent events and any strategic needs for the
longer-term. Though for some modifications the regulations require Member States to submit proposals to
the Commission for approval.

However, the degree of flexibility must be within the scope of Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999.
it would be possible to support the re-establishment of businesses
Therefore, under these measures,
through diversification or other investments to either reduce production costs or to improve and redeploy
production. But, it is not possible, for example, to use this support to re-stock farms that have suffered the
destruction of their livestock.

The abovementioned Regulation includes provision for other (cid:145)structural(cid:146) measures which may be able to
provide support for businesses facing difficulties as a result of foot-and-mouth disease. These include
support for processing and marketing of agricultural products, training, infrastructure for agriculture, basic
services for the rural economy and population, renovation and development of villages and tourism and
craft activities. It will be a matter for the Member States to decide how best these can be utilised (including

20.12.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 364 E/105

the level of allocated financial resources) as part of the solution for either the immediate crisis or in the
longer term recovery. The Commission is aware of decisions, already taken or, being considered by,
Programme Monitoring Committees of current Structural Fund programmes to (cid:145)fast-track(cid:146) projects related
to tourism, promotion or marketing schemes, business support and other relevant schemes, to assist the
worst hit regions to overcome the difficulties they face.

(1) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999.

(2001/C 364 E/115)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1412/01

by Evelyne Gebhardt (PSE), Heinz Kindermann (PSE)
and Willi G(cid:246)rlach (PSE) to the Commission

(14 May 2001)

Subject: Free trade in the plant protection sector, EU Directive 91/414/EEC

Small and medium-sized producers in the plant protection sector take the view that Directive 91/414/
EEC (1), and in particular Article 13(3)(d) thereof, consolidates the monopoly position of multinational firms
instead of promoting free trade, and argue that small and medium-sized producers do not have the
financial resources to fund the studies required to obtain renewed authorisation from the EU authorities
for existing active substances. As few firms can afford to fund such studies, they claim, this requirement
clearly places small and medium-sized producers at a competitive disadvantage.

Does the Commission endorse that view?

In the United States, by contrast, multinational companies are obliged by law to share newly completed
studies on existing active substances with their smaller competitors, subject to their paying an appropriate
share of the costs (the (cid:145)data compensation system(cid:146)).

Is it true that the situation described above arose because of the lack of legislation in the Member States on
fair access to data?

Would it be possible to consider solving such problems by means of a pan-European system to ensure fair
access to data within the framework of Directive 91/414/EEC? Would the Commission be prepared to take
action to achieve that end?

(1) OJ L 230, 19.8.1991, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(23 July 2001)

Article 13, paragraphs 3 and 4, of Council Directive 91/414/EEC of 15 July 1991 concerning the placing
of plant protection products on the market contains the rules on data protection. These rules have to be
applied by Member States when granting authorizations for plant protection products.

The rules, adopted by Council in 1991, intend to strike a balance between the interest of research-based
companies and the smaller companies. The research-based companies have to invest a large amount of
money in order to present a dossier meeting the strict requirements of the Directive. The fact that smaller
companies can enter the market after the expiry of the data protection period aims to ensure that no
unlimited monopoly positions are created and that plant protection products are available at competitive
prices for users. Nevertheless, the Commission recognises the concerns expressed by smaller companies
and will consider what measures might be introduced to encourage their involvement in the market and
the development of innovative products in a forthcoming review of Directive 91/414/EEC planned for
2002.