WRITTEN QUESTION E-2922/01 by Markus Ferber (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Maritime safety.
Date: 2001-10-17
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European standard, International Maritime Organisation, international standard, maritime safety, tanker, technical regulations

16.5.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 115 E/193

Can the Commission answer the following:

1.

In view of EEC Regulation 2408/92, does there exist any technical obstacle preventing the Spanish
government, should it consider it desirable, from making a public service declaration in respect of air
transport between the various Balearic Islands and between those islands and the Iberian peninsula?

2. Does the Commission consider it desirable to declare the above-mentioned routes to qualify for a
public service classification, given such existing EU precedents as the public service declaration
approved for air routes within the Canary Islands?

(1) OJ L 240, 24.8.1992, p. 8.

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(7 December 2001)

As far as the Commission is aware, there is no obstacle preventing the Spanish authorities from invoking
Article 4 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92 of 23 July 1992 on access for Community air carriers
to intra-Community air routes (1).

In the case raised by the Honourable Member, a decision of this kind would be the responsibility of the
Spanish authorities, since the Commission simply has to check the correct application by the Member
States of the provisions of Article 4 of Regulation No 2408/92.

(1) OJ L 240, 24.8.1992.

(2002/C 115 E/204)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2922/01

by Markus Ferber (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(17 October 2001)

Subject: Maritime safety

Amongst the EU’s proposals concerning transport safety is the Erika I package of measures, which includes
a proposal for a European Parliament and Council regulation on the accelerated phasing-in of double hulls
for oil tankers, which is not in line with IMO rules.

The Commission has proposed going it alone and adopting the regulation in the event of it not being
possible to reach an agreement with the IMO.

Can the European Union adopt maritime safety rules which are inconsistent with those of the IMO?

Answer given by Mme de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(3 December 2001)

The Commission wishes to underline that the measures relating to single-hulled oil tankers are in line with
international law. To this end it points out that its original proposal, like the approach adopted by the
Council and Parliament, should be regarded as seeking to lay down a condition for entry into Member
States’ ports or waterways.

the Maríne Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) of

As regards the follow-up to its original proposal, the Commission wishes to point out that, following a
decision of
the International Maritime
Organisation (IMO), the timetable for the withdrawal of single-hulled oil tankers has, broadly speaking,
been brought into line with that recommended by the Commission. Accordingly, and following the
opinion of Parliament, the Commission has amended its original proposal (1) to align it with the new IMO
rules.

C 115 E/194

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

16.5.2002

Following a favourable opinion by Parliament’s Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism, at
its meeting on 9, 10 and 11 October 2001, regarding the common position of the Council of 7 August
2001, the new regulation should be formally adopted by the end of the year.

Given the global dimension of shipping, the Union is endeavouring to align its regulations with those of
the IMO. However, it is possible that it will adopt, if necessary, provisions which go beyond those of the
IMO, in accordance with the legal bases conferred by the Treaty.

(1) COM(2000) 848 final.

(2002/C 115 E/205)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2923/01

by Antonios Trakatellis (PPE-DE) and Ioannis Averoff (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(17 October 2001)

Subject: Infringements of Community law through the illegal withholding of Community aid, practices

pursued by the Agricultural Bank of Greece, and late payment of Community aid

The practice applied by certain agricultural cooperatives of illegally withholding Community aid and
making late payments to beneficiaries is a chronic problem severely affecting Greek farmers. The
Agricultural Bank of Greece (ATE) sustains and shields these practices with its new interventionist system
of managing and paying out Community aid,
illegally and unduly profiting from Community funds
intended for third parties. In addition, the bank is creating unfair competition, distortion of competition
thereby perpetuating the outmoded structures of Greek
and illegal monopolistic credit practices,
agriculture. An example of this policy is the following power of attorney which farmers are required to
sign:

The Producer …: being aware of
Community legislation, authorises:

the procedures and consequences under current national and

1. The OP-EAS Mesolongi-Navpaktos, of which he is a member:

(a)

(b)

to take all necessary measures to pay, by crediting to his account by magnetic means, the
advances and subsidies payable under the relevant EEC Regulations and decisions of the
Ministry for Agriculture, and

to take all necessary measures to debit from his account, through the ATE, his liabilities to
third parties, in particular:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)

ELGA (Greek agricultural insurance),
to the Directorate for Finance, any tax due,
to third parties, any unduly paid amounts, and
to OP-EAS Mesolongi-Navpaktos, any commission it may be entitled to for the above
work, as set out in each case by decision of the General Assembly or the Executive
Committee, and to pay them to the relevant agencies (Directorate for Finance,
Directorate for the Administration of Agricultural Produce, etc.).

2. The ATE to proceed:

(a)

to credit the account as set out in paragraph (1a) above, and

(b)

to debit the account as set out in paragraph (1b) above, and to credit and debit those
amounts to or from the relevant accounts, the relevant agencies or third parties,

3. Confers on OP-EAS Mesolongi-Navpaktos the right, after payment of the above amounts, to

withhold his liabilities towards it by debiting his account through the ATE.