WRITTEN QUESTION P-2062/01 by Sir Robert Atkins (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Air traffic delays.
Date: 2001-07-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: air traffic, air transport, common transport policy, management, organisation of transport

11.12.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 350 E/237

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(20 July 2001)

Under Article 2(2) of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement (which has been incor-
porated into the Union framework), a Member State may decide, where public policy or national security
so require, and after consulting the other Member States, that internal border checks appropriate to the
situation are to be reinstated for a limited period.

If public policy or national security require immediate action, a Member State may take the necessary
measures and inform the other Member States thereof at the earliest opportunity.

The reinstatement of checks at internal borders is therefore an exceptional measure, which must be
proportionate to the situation confronting the Member State. It must also be limited to the duration of the
threat to public policy or national security. The final decision on reintroducing border checks rests with
the Member State concerned.

The above explanations reflect the Schengen acquis as it has been incorporated into the Union framework.
The acquis as a whole, which is intergovernmental in origin, will have to be replaced by appropriate legal
instruments under the first and third pillars.

In its work programme, the Commission announced its intention of presenting a legislative proposal
relating to Article 2 of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement.

In the meantime, the Commission considers that it is entitled to receive notifications in the same manner
and at the same time as Member States applying the Schengen Agreement, by virtue of its role as guardian
of the Treaty. In this capacity it also takes part in the relevant consultations.

(2001/C 350 E/270)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2062/01

by Sir Robert Atkins (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(3 July 2001)

Subject: Air traffic delays

Does the Commission recognise the anger and frustration felt by European air travellers about the
increasing delays caused by air traffic congestion and what urgent steps does it intend to take to resolve
these continuing and unacceptable problems?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(31 July 2001)

The Commission shares the concerns of the Honourable Member on the delays caused by air traffic
congestion. Air Traffic Management delays in the first five months of 2001 remain too high although
there has been a small drop in the total traffic compared with 2000.

The Commission put in place a High Level Group in early 2000 in order to develop improvements to the
current organisation of air traffic services. The High Level Group reported in November 2000 (1) and the
Commission is now preparing legislative proposals to follow up on that report. These proposals will set
out a common approach to the organisation of airspace and service provision and to the standardisation of
equipment.

The Commission hopes that these proposals will be favourably received by the Community legislator and
will have a significant impact on delays. It has welcomed the support contained in the Parliament(cid:146)s report,
drafted by the Honourable Member, on the creation of the Single Sky (2). The European Council has also

C 350 E/238

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

11.12.2001

considered this issue at its two recent meetings, recalling the importance of the Single Sky initiative at
G(cid:246)teborg on 15 and 16 June 2001.

(1) http://europa.eu.int/comm/transport/themes/air/ses_en.pdf.
(2) Report A5-0141/2000, 26.5.2000.

(2001/C 350 E/271)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2115/01

by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission

(13 July 2001)

Subject: Future of the Common Fisheries Policy

Given the recent EU Green Paper on reform of the Common Fisheries Policy which accepts the need for
radical change of the Common Fisheries Policy, and the fact that the current 6 and 12 mile derogations do
not adequately protect the sustainability of the shellfish resource, does the Commission plan to extend
national jurisdiction over fish resources to the 12 mile limit in order to protect the inshore fishery?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(30 July 2001)

In the Green Paper the Commission suggested strengthening coastal States(cid:146) competence for resource
management and in particular local conservation measures within their territorial waters. The current
arrangements for limiting access to the 12-mile zone also seem perfectly in line with the need to protect
inshore fishing.

(2001/C 350 E/272)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2130/01

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(17 July 2001)

Subject: Compliance with Directive 91/321/EEC on infant formulae

The Commission says that (cid:145)it does not see, from the information supplied by the Honourable Member, in
how far the promotional measures described could distort competition between hospitals and suppliers(cid:146)
(P-1229/01) (1). Yet the Belgian Minister for Consumer Affairs, Public Health and the Environment, Magda
Aelvoet, has said in answer to a request for clarification from Senator Sabine de Bethune that the sales
promotion campaigns by infant formulae manufacturers violate the relevant decree (Thursday, 22 March).

Infant formulae manufacturers are distributing free samples of infant formulae in Belgian maternity wards
as a way of advertising these products. This approach is not only illegal. It also contravenes the EC Treaty
the WHO Code, namely that
(by distorting competition) and is contrary to the key objective of
breastfeeding should be encouraged in the interests of health. Moreover,
it is clear that the national
authorities, in this case the Belgian Federation, are failing to tackle the problem.

Will the Commission take action in response to the national authorities(cid:146) failure to ensure that (cid:145)the
legislation in force is respected by all interested parties(cid:146) in the Belgian Federation? If so, what will the
Commission do to ensure that manufacturers of infant formulae cease to distribute free samples in Belgian
maternity wards in order to advertise these products? If not, on what grounds does the Commission