WRITTEN QUESTION P-0163/02 by Werner Langen (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Sparkling wine production in Italy and Austria.
Date: 2002-01-29
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Austria, Germany, Italy, beverage industry, derogation from EU law, infringement of EU law, restriction on competition, sparkling wine, vinification, viticulture

29.8.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 205 E/85

Should the Commission be informed that Community law is being breached in the specific case, it would
not hesitate, as the guardian of
including infringement
procedures under Article 226 of the EC Treaty, in order to ensure the observance of relevant Community
law.

to take all necessary measures,

the Treaty,

Concerning the recovery of former quarrying areas, including eventual feasibility studies, the initiative has
to come from the Member States, and launching a feasibility study is not within the competencies of the
Commission. Such measures can be financed through Structural Funds, if they are provided for in the
Regional Operational Plan. The LIFE financial instrument (4), and in particular LIFE-Nature, is dedicated to
the implementation of the Natura 2000 network. For those quarries located inside a proposed Site of
Community Importance, LIFE funds could therefore be used to restore the ecological value of the site.

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.
(2) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997.
(3) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.
(4) Regulation (EC) No 1655/2000 of the Parliament and of the Council, of 17 July 2000, concerning the Financial

Instrument for the Environment (LIFE), OJ L 192, 28.7.2000.

(2002/C 205 E/095)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0163/02

by Werner Langen (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(29 January 2002)

Subject: Sparkling wine production in Italy and Austria

’Prosecco’ semi-sparkling wines sold by Italian firms exceed the maximum limit in respect of pressure of
semi-sparkling wine clearly laid down in EU wine legislation (maximum 2,5 bar). This infringement was
detected in Germany and an appropriate complaint made to Italy. The German methods of measurement
used were apparently called into question by the Italian authorities and the matter shelved. Italian firms
therefore continue to be permitted to sell proseccos with a pressure of more than 2,5 bar.

The addition of gold leaf to sparkling wines has been banned throughout the EU. However, Austrian
sparkling wine producers have now been given special permission to conduct a large-scale trial. As a
result, Austrian firms are now selling sparkling wine containing gold leaf without facing competition.

Is the Commission aware of these facts?

What measures does the Commission intend to take to stop the maximum limit in respect of pressure of
semi-sparkling wine being exceeded in Italy?

Who gave special permission for a large-scale trial of sparkling wine containing gold leaf in Austria, and
does the Commission consider that this trial contravenes competition rules in the European Union?

Supplementary answer
given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(25 March 2002)

Having checked with the national authorities, the Commission is now in a position to clarify the issues
raised by the Honourable Member.

C 205 E/86

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

29.8.2002

‘Prosecco del Veneto’ sparkling wine for compliance with the
When checking a consignment of
information on the label and the accompanying documentation, the German authorities found pressure
levels due to carbon dioxide above 2,5 bar and also exogenous carbon dioxide. Its description as ‘a semi-
sparkling wine’ did not tally with the definition laid down in point 17 of Annex I to Regulation (EC) No
1493/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in wine (1), so permission was not
granted to place the wine in question on the market. The German authorities informed the Italian and
Commission control authorities in accordance with Article 8 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2729/
2000 of 14 December 2000 laying down detailed implementing rules on controls in the wine sector (2).
The maximum permitted carbon dioxide pressure of 2,5 bar laid down in Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999
like the other
for semi-sparkling wines is not contested by the Italian authorities and this parameter,
parameters for this type of wine, continues to be checked, where appropriate, by the competent control
authorities.

Adding gold leaf to sparkling wines is not one of the oenological practices listed in Annex V to Regulation
(EC) No 1493/1999, and so is not permitted.

In accordance with Article 41 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1622/2000 of 24 July 2000 laying down
certain detailed rules for implementing Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999 and establishing a Community code
of oenological practices and processes (3), the Austrian authorities informed the Commission of the
experimental use of this new oenological practice. The authorisation covers 7 000 hectolitres a year, the
intention being to develop this product and gauge the market response to it. The Commission will be
informed of the results. These wines cannot be sent outside Austria. The terms of this experiment on a
sparkling wine as notified by Austria thus comply with Regulation (EC) No 1622/2000.

Furthermore, another drink containing gold particles is produced in Austria as an ‘aromatized sparkling
wine-based drink’. This product, which differs from sparkling wine, satisfies Community legislation and in
particular the rules laid down in Council Regulation (EEC) No 1601/91 of 10 June 1991 laying down
general rules on the definition, description and presentation of aromatized wines, aromatized wine-based
drinks and aromatized wine-product cocktails (4).

(1) OJ L 179, 14.7.1999.
(2) OJ L 316, 15.12.2000.
(3) OJ L 194, 31.7.2000.
(4) OJ L 149, 14.6.1991.

(2002/C 205 E/096)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0169/02

by Raffaele Costa (PPE-DE) to the Council

(5 February 2002)

Subject: Executions in China

China holds the unenviable world record in executions, of which there were more than 2 000 in 2001
alone. Chinese law provides for the death sentence for a wide range of offences, including, in some cases,
embezzlement, the establishment of illegal sects, which are subject to widespread political manipulation,
thereby depriving citizens of their right to freedom.

Would the Council, which stands as guarantor of human rights as upheld by the European Union, not
agree that the participation of European countries in the 2008 Olympics in China should be reconsidered?

Would it not agree that European countries should withdraw their support from the 2008 Olympics in
China unless appropriate institutional reforms are immediately introduced?