WRITTEN QUESTION E-1838/01 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Abolition of aid to the tobacco sector.
Date: 2001-06-26
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: health policy, impact study, mental health, smoking, suspension of aid, tobacco industry

C 40 E/118

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

14.2.2002

(2002/C 40 E/117)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1838/01

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

Subject: Abolition of aid to the tobacco sector

(26 June 2001)

In connection with the Commission(cid:146)s proposal on the advertising of tobacco products and the views on
(cid:145)sustainable(cid:146) development presented at the Gothenburg Summit, the Commission has recently drawn up
proposals to abolish aid to tobacco-growing as part of its anti-smoking campaign. The proposal to abolish
aid, which in any case is not accompanied by any measures whatever to reduce tobacco imports, does not
address the harmful effects of smoking and will only result in the economic and social collapse of entire
regions which are among the most disadvantaged in the European Union and where tobacco-growing is
now the only possibility.

In view of the fact that the Commission is required under the current regulation to submit a report on the
tobacco sector by 1 April 2002, will it say:

1. on which data and studies it based its decision to propose the abolition of aid to tobacco,

2. whether a study has been carried out into the impact of abolishing European tobacco farming on the

problem of smoking, and

3.

if it is in fact interested in reducing the consumption of tobacco in the EU, why its proposals do not
focus solely on restricting imports of tobacco (70 % of the tobacco used by EU manufacturers is
imported from the USA and other countries) and thereby avoid creating an insurmountable economic
and social problem in the most disadvantaged regions of the EU?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(3 September 2001)

On 15 May 2001 the Commission adopted a communication entitled (cid:145)A Sustainable Europe for a Better
World: A European Union Strategy for Sustainable Development(cid:146) (1) in the run-up to the European Council
in Gothenburg on 15 and 16 June 2001.

Among the public-health measures proposed, the document lists the phasing-out of tobacco subsidies
following on from the review, to be completed in 2002, of the common organisation of the market (COM)
in tobacco.

The effect on human health of tobacco consumption, the principal avoidable cause of mortality and
disease in the EU, justifies abolishing the aid. Over 500 000 deaths a year are blamed on smoking.

Subsidies for tobacco growing therefore conflict with Article 152 (ex Article 129) of the EC Treaty, which
states that (cid:145)A high level of human health protection shall be ensured in the definition and implementation
of all Community policies and activities.(cid:146) The Commission accordingly felt it was not necessary to
undertake studies on the impact
tobacco production might have on
consumption of tobacco products.

the discontinuation of

that

Recently, however, the Commission did publish a call for tenders for an evaluation study to assess the
repercussions of Community regulations on the tobacco sector under the systematic assessment of
agricultural measures. The evaluation will seek to determine inter alia how effective, consistent, relevant
and useful such measures are and will make a contribution to a review of the market organisation for raw
tobacco by allowing us to take overall stock of the regime.

At all events, the Commission communication states that the phasing-out of tobacco subsidies must go
hand-in-hand with measures to develop alternative sources of income and economic activity for tobacco
workers and growers.

14.2.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 40 E/119

The Commission will seek to ensure that the vitality of the economic and social fabric of tobacco-growing
areas is safeguarded.

As to the Honourable Member(cid:146)s suggestion on restricting imports of raw tobacco, any curb on imports
would call for the introduction of a system of tariff quotas or other restrictive measures that would not be
compatible with the Community(cid:146)s commitments within the World Trade Organisation (WTO).

(1) COM(2001) 264 final.

(2002/C 40 E/118)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1840/01

by Esko Sepp(cid:228)nen (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(26 June 2001)

Subject: Water purification plants in Brussels

In its reply to my oral question H-0355/98 (1) the Commission said it did not consider that the Belgian
authorities had complied with their (cid:145)obligations stemming from the Urban Waste Water Treatment
Directive 91/271/EEC (2), and in particular with Article 17(cid:146). In its role as the Guardian of the Treaty, the
Commission had therefore (cid:145)taken the necessary steps towards an infringement procedure under Article 169
of the EC Treaty(cid:146).

Have the Belgian authorities since complied with the requirements of the directive, and what has been the
outcome of the Commission(cid:146)s infringements proceedings?

(1) Written answer of 31 March 1998.
(2) OJ L 135, 30.5.1991, p. 40.

Answer given by Mrs Wallstr(cid:246)m on behalf of the Commission

(5 September 2001)

Belgium is late in implementing Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1999 on urban waste water
treatment (1). Besides Brussels, many other big agglomerations in Flanders and Wallonia still
lack
appropriate urban waste water treatment. The Commission has taken action following a dual track process.

A first infringement procedure was opened in 1998 because of the incorrect content of the programme for
the implementation of the Directive. The Commission action has led to the condemnation of Belgium by
the Court of Justice of the European Communities by a judgement delivered on 6 July 2000 (2).

A second infringement procedure was opened in 1999 because of the delayed implementation of the
Directive in respect of the building of sewers and waste-water treatment plants in sensitive areas.

In the case of Brussels-Capital a waste water treatment plant, that purifies the waste water of 360 000
(cid:145)population equivalent(cid:146) (p.e.) has been constructed. However the second treatment plant with a foreseen
capacity of 1 100 000 p.e., is still in the planning phase. The region of Brussels-Capital plans to be in
conformity with the Directive in 2005. As the region of Brussels is identified as discharging into a sensitive
area, the above requirements of the directive should have been met by 31 December 1998.

With regard to Article 17 the Brussels authorities have provided the Commission with an implementation
programme, but the programme is still insufficient regarding the collecting system.

A reasoned opinion was notified to Belgium in 2000. The Commission decided to refer this case to the
Court of Justice at its last infringement meeting.

(1) OJ L 135, 30.5.1991.
(2) Case C-236/99, Commission v. Kingdom of Belgium, not yet published, http://curia.eu.int/en/index.htm.