WRITTEN QUESTION E-1316/02 by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Cultivation of low-THC hemp.
Date: 2002-05-08
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU aid, EU law - national law, Sweden, aid to agriculture, alternative use of agricultural products, common organisation of markets, drug addiction, drug traffic, hemp, land use

C 301 E/122

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

5.12.2002

(2002/C 301 E/128)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1316/02

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(8 May 2002)

Subject: Cultivation of low-THC hemp

Authorising the cultivation of low THC hemp gives rise to wide-ranging problems with control since it is
not possible to distinguish between plants with a low or high THC content. The International Narcotics
Control Board (INCB) has warned in several of its annual reports (e.g. 1997) that the steeply rising
cultivation of hemp in the Union may make the necessary regulation and control of crops impossible. The
INCB has also pointed out how important it is that the Member States’ governments and the Union’s
institutions do not take account only of environmental, industrial and economic aspects in their work but
also take drug control into consideration. The annual report for 1999 also reveals that in many cases,
fields in which low- THC hemp was supposedly being grown were being used quite simply to grow high-
THC hemp for the illegal market. According to official reports from Switzerland, the vast majority of the
sites supposedly growing low-THC hemp are used for the production of cannabis for the illegal drugs
market. An estimated 100 tonnes of cannabis were harvested during 1998 in this manner in Switzerland.
The drug is distributed nationally through a network of ‘hemp shops’ and also to other European countries
(INCB Report 1999, paragraphs 455-456).

When will the Commission submit a proposal to change the common organisation of the market in flax
and hemp so that the cultivation of hemp is no longer eligible for Community aid?

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-1313/02, E-1315/02 and E-1316/02
given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(21 June 2002)

Hemp (Cannabis sativa) features in the following Community agricultural legislation:

(cid:1) Council Regulation (EC) No 1673/2000 of 27 July 2000 on common organisation of the markets in
flax and hemp grown for fibre (1). This provides for processing aid for hemp grown for fibre
production.

(cid:1) Council Regulation (EC) No 1251/1999 of 17 May 1999 establishing a support system for producers
of certain arable crops (2), as amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 1672/2000 of 27 July 2000 (1).

(cid:1) Council Regulation (EEC) No 2358/71 of 26 October 1971 on common organisation of the market in

seeds (3). Aid can be given for production of certified seed of fibre flax.

(cid:1) Commission Regulation (EC) no 2461/1999 of 19 November 1999 laying down detailed rules for
application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1251/1999 as regards the use of set aside land for
production of raw materials used for manufacture in the Community of products not primarily
intended for human or animal consumption (4).

The provision embodied in these Regulations supports hemp grown to produce fibre and other
raw materials but eliminate the risk to health by imposing very strict terms on the aid, the only eligible
varieties being those with a very low tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) content (0,2 %).

5.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 301 E/123

The Council also requires Member States to introduce a rigorous inspection system, application of which
lead to withdrawal of varieties with a THC content above 0,2 %.

Sweden’s legislation on the other hand prohibits growing and processing of any hemp except under
authorisation granted for very specific utilisations.

As a result it is impossible for hemp seed intended for fibre production to be imported into Sweden.

As the Honourable Member mentions the Swedish authorities have referred to the Court of Justice for a
preliminary ruling a number of questions relating to conformity of the national prohibition on hemp
cultivation with Community law.

Pending the Court’s ruling the Commission does not intend to propose any change in the provisions in
force.

(1) OJ L 193, 29.7.2000.
(2) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999.
(3) OJ L 246, 5.11.1971.
(4) OJ L 299, 20.11.1999.

(2002/C 301 E/129)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1319/02

by Catherine Stihler (PSE) to the Commission

(29 April 2002)

Subject: Access to information on fisheries policy

Publication of the first package of legislative reforms of the Common Fisheries Policy is currently delayed
for at least another month. However, copies of the proposals under discussion have been circulating freely
for the some weeks. Many NGOs and industry organisations apparently have access to drafts but MEPs
cannot officially obtain copies even of those parts of the package not still under negotiation. In the
the
interests of a level playing field of
Commission formally review its procedures of providing draft copies to interested parties, including MEPs?

information and meaningful consultation with MEPs will

(2002/C 301 E/130)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1325/02

by Ian Hudghton (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(2 May 2002)

Subject: Access to information on fisheries policy

Publication of the first package of legislative reforms of the Common Fisheries Policy is currently delayed
for at least another month. However, copies of the proposals under discussion have been circulating freely
for the some weeks. Many NGOs and industry organisations apparently have access to drafts but MEPs
cannot officially obtain copies even of those parts of the package not still under negotiation. In the
the
interests of a level playing field of
Commission formally review its procedures for providing draft copies to interested parties,
including
MEPs?

information and meaningful consultation with MEPs will