WRITTEN QUESTION E-1506/02 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Production of vinegar from dried grapes.
Date: 2002-05-29
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Greece, condiment, dried product, grape, terminology

6.2.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 28 E/113

the Commission has requested the Greek
As far as Structural and Cohesion Funds are concerned,
authorities to provide the information about the individual projects that have been funded and the exact
amounts involved. This will be forwarded to the Honourable Member upon receipt.

Furthermore, the Commission has conducted review meetings in recent months to assess in partnership
with the Greek authorities the scale of the task remaining to be done, in an effort to ensure that the most
urgent investment requirements are undertaken as soon as possible in order to improve compliance with
the relevant Community legislation.

As is foreseen in the Community support framework for the current programming period 2000-2006, the
Greek authorities are establishing a technical support entity to give guidance where necessary to municipal
authorities in particular,
for their
maintenance and operation after completion.

for the proper design of sewage treatment plants, and support

This should help to avoid the problems in the maintenance and operation of previously completed sewage
treatment plants of the kind referred to by the Honourable Member. The decision of the Greek government
to establish bodies (DEYAs) with the appropriate competence and financial capacity is also a positive step
which should improve efficiency in the building and operation of sewage treatment plants.

(1) OJ L 135, 30.5.1991.

(2003/C 28 E/127)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1506/02

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

Subject: Production of vinegar from dried grapes

(29 May 2002)

From ancient times vinegar has been made in Greece from sun-dried grapes (mainly the Corinthian
variety);
in the Greek Food Code it is described as ‘genuine vinegar’ and is exported very successfully
throughout the world.

In the regulation on wine, (EC) No 1493/1999 (1), in spite of the fact that there is a reference to wine
vinegar, there is no clear stipulation that vinegar made from dried grapes is wine vinegar, although the
regulation states that dried grape alcohol is equivalent to vinous alcohol.

Since the production of vinegar from dried grapes is an activity which supports producers, particularly
those from an especially backward and poor region such as the Peloponnese, can the Commission say
whether it will make the requisite amendments to Regulation No 1493/99, in order to clearly stipulate that
vinegar from sun-dried grapes is wine vinegar, as is in fact the case, and to bring it into line with dried
grape alcohol?

(1) OJ L 179, 14.7.1999, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(4 July 2002)

Dried grape alcohol is not defined in Council Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999 on common organisation of
the market in wine but is treated as a like product to wine alcohol when used in production of liqueur
wine as defined in the Annex to that Regulation. But Council Regulation (EEC) No 1576/89 of 29 May
1989 laying down general rules on the definition, description and presentation of spirit drinks (1) defines
wine spirit and raisin spirit quite differently (Article 1(4)(d) and (h)).

A distinction must also be drawn in the case of vinegar. Annex I to Council Regulation (EC) No 1493/
1999 defines wine vinegar as vinegar … obtained exclusively by acetous fermentation of wine.

C 28 E/114

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

6.2.2003

Wine is defined in the Community rules as the product obtained exclusively from total or partial alcoholic
fermentation of fresh grapes, whether or not crushed, or of grape must. Thus alcoholic fermentation of
dried grapes cannot produce wine and the Commission considers that dried grape vinegar, not being
produced from wine, is not covered by Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999.

The Commission therefore has no plans for addition to the Regulation of definitions or specific provisions
relating to that product.

(1) OJ L 160, 12.6.1989.

(2003/C 28 E/128)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1512/02

by Olivier Dupuis (NI) to the Commission

(29 May 2002)

Subject: Political and institutional situation in Georgia

the Citizens’ Union of Georgia (CUG) was forbidden by a Tbilisi court

On 29 April 2002,
from
participating in the country’s first municipal elections, which will take place on 2 June 2002. The decision
was taken on the basis of a petition submitted by four citizens, without the party officials having been
heard by the court. Although it should have been sent directly to the Central Electoral Committee, the
decision was not sent until 3 May, which prevented the party officials from lodging an appeal with the
court before 7 May, the deadline for the submission of lists of candidates for the elections. More seriously,
the Supreme Court, with which Mr Zurab Zhvania, leader of the Citizens’ Union of Georgia, had lodged
the appeal, deliberately delayed proceedings, thereby making it impossible for the lists of candidates to be
presented within the time allowed. Moreover, the Central Electoral Committee repealed the article of the
electoral
the various parties in the electoral
committees of the various districts. Finally, there have been numerous cases of CUG members in the
Central Electoral Committee being subjected to threats and intimidation.

law providing for the presence of representatives of

What political initiatives and diplomatic steps has the Commission taken, or does it intend to take, before
the elections on 2 June so as to persuade the Georgian authorities to reconsider this very serious decision
and ensure full compliance with the electoral laws in force? More generally, does not the Commission
believe that it is high time for the EU to move from occasional criticism of corruption to the drawing up
of a policy based on the definition of a clear prospect for Georgia’s accession to the EU as the foundation
for a policy of ambitious reforms in that country?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(25 June 2002)

The Commission shares concerns about insufficient progress with democratic reform in Georgia. The way
the local elections were conducted last 2 June 2002 was a worrying confirmation of a long-standing
pattern. In particular, it was disappointing that commitments to introduce electoral reforms, undertaken
following the Presidential elections in 2000, were not respected.

The Commission takes every possible opportunity to express its concerns to the Georgian authorities,
including in the framework of the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement. The last occasion was during
the visit of President Shevardnadze to Brussels last March. The Commission will continue to do so on the
occasion of the forthcoming EU-Georgia Cooperation Committee on 26 June 2002 which will prepare for
the next EU-Georgia Cooperation Council on 1 October 2002.

The Commission already (1) had the opportunity to explain why it considers that there is no realistic
prospect of Georgia’s accession to the EU in present circumstances. The priority today should be to resolve
the two internal conflicts, as well as to implement the reform agenda and to maximise the potential offered
by the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement. The Commission shall continue to support Georgia
through cooperation and assistance programmes and with political support.

(1) Reply to oral question H-0372/02 by the Honourable Member, written reply, June 2002.