WRITTEN QUESTION P-0442/02 by Samuli Pohjamo (ELDR) to the Commission. Study of regional policy in Arctic regions.
Date: 2002-02-12
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU regional policy, economic analysis, economic and social cohesion, island region, less-favoured region, mountain region

29.8.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 205 E/141

Member States are entitled to require vessels flying their flag to have an ‘effective economic link’ with their
coast. The complaint is over Belgium’s application of this requirement. A vessel owner may choose several
different ways (or a combination of ways) of meeting this requirement: residence of a significant part of
the crew in the coastal area,
landing and/or sale of a determined proportion of catches in the
Member State’s ports, departure of a significant percentage of the fishing trips from the Member State’s
ports with purchase of the vessel’s supplies in them, etc. The Court of Justice has by its decisions set limits
to the scope of such rules so that Community law is not infringed.

In its first assessment the Commission considered that the requirement was being applied by Belgium in a
way that did in fact infringe Community law. On 11 April 2001 it formally notified Belgium by letter of
this finding.

The Belgian authorities communicated their observations in a letter of 15 June. The Commission was due
to decide what follow-up action it wished to take when examining the second half-yearly report on
infringements for 2001. On 5 October 2001 it received from Belgium a letter containing further
observations to which were attached very recent judgments by the Belgian courts relating to the matter in
dispute. It thought it important to analyse this additional information, which meant that a decision could
not be taken in the course of examining the second report for 2001.

Consideration of the case has therefore been deferred to the first report for 2002, i.e. to July 2002.

The Commission adopts the same approach to obligations imposed by public authorities and by private
groupings. Its task is to watch over respect for Community law and it strives to bring about the cessation
of detected infringements whatever the status of the offender. In these functions it is subject to rules of
procedure set by the EC Treaty and the secondary legislation.

It is this spirit that has informed two separate procedures, initiated by different Commission Directorates-
General, one concerning the ‘effective economic link’ problem mentioned above and the other the
requirement imposed on Dutch fishermen by their management groups to sell all their catches at Dutch
auction markets. Each procedure has been in line with the relevant provisions, in the case of the former
those of Article 226(2) of the EC Treaty and in the case of the latter the specific provisions of Article 81 of
the Treaty on agreements between undertakings and concerted practices. That procedure has now been
closed following the management group’s withdrawal of the obligation to sell at Dutch auction markets
but the first procedure is still in progress.

The Commission will inform the Honourable Members of the position it adopts.

The Commission publishes recent infringement decisions on the Europa site: http://europa.eu.int/comm/
secretariat_general/sgb/droit_com/index_en.htm#infringements. The information is
regularly updated,
notably following each periodical report on confirmed and possible infringements.

(2002/C 205 E/152)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0442/02

by Samuli Pohjamo (ELDR) to the Commission

(12 February 2002)

Subject: Study of regional policy in Arctic regions

The Commission’s recent progress report on economic and social cohesion (1) highlights the fact that the
Commission is undertaking studies of regions suffering from permanent natural handicaps. It is also
organising a number of seminars to consider the problems of these regions.

C 205 E/142

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

29.8.2002

The Commission is planning to carry out two studies, one on island regions and one on mountain areas.
The aim is to collect information about the factors that hamper regional development. At the same time,
the intention is to discuss the development needs of the regions and methods whereby new development
can be initiated in those areas.

Will the Commission also carry out a study of the needs of the sparsely settled region in the North and
methods of developing it? How will it address the problems of these regions when arranging the various
seminars to prepare future EU regional policy?

(1) COM(2002) 46.

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(7 March 2002)

As it stated in its First progress report on economic and social cohesion (1), the Commission has requested
two studies, one on island regions and the other on mountain areas, in order to carry out an objective
diagnosis of their situation. The study on mountain areas includes the Arctic areas, in this case those
located north of the 62nd parallel. The study is intended to quantify and assess the handicaps affecting
these areas, describe their specific needs and look at the actions and policies developed by the Member
States and the Union and the impact they have had.

Moreover, the question of the northern areas with a low population density will be on the agenda for the
seminar on territorial priorities to be held on 27 and 28 May 2002 in Brussels to which Parliament will be
invited and will also be covered in the workshop on the European integration of the regions. These
seminars will seek to assess whether there is, for each priority, a field of Community assistance to be
defined which would in future constitute an area of eligibility under the Structural Funds.

(1) COM(2002) 46 final.

(2002/C 205 E/153)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0444/02

by Torben Lund (PSE) to the Commission

(21 February 2002)

Subject: Further postponement of a long overdue revision of the 1991 Directive on batteries

The revision of the Directive on batteries (91/157 (1) and 93/86 (2)) has been in preparation since 1997,
but has been put back on several occasions, inter alia because it did not contain assessments of the risk
presented by cadmium for example, although Denmark and the Netherlands have had complete bans on
the use of cadmium since the Eighties and despite the Council resolution of 25 January 1988 (3), in which
the Commission was called upon to pursue without delay the development of specific measures for a
Community action programme to combat environmental pollution by cadmium, and despite the Council’s
conclusions of June 2001 that new electrical and electronic equipment should not contain cadmium. Does
the Commission know of companies producing batteries containing no cadmium; if so, will it list the
companies, and their products?

At an informal meeting in December 2001 with a number of PSE members of the European Parliament’s
Committee on the Environment, Commissioner Wallström said that a Commission proposal was expected
in January 2002, but it appears that the proposal has been postponed again. What was the reason for
postponing it again? Is it because of matters that could not be investigated over the last nearly five years?
in this matter have approached the
Which major industrial groups or companies with an interest