WRITTEN QUESTION P-1804/02 by Dominique Souchet (NI) to the Commission. Urgent action in support of beekeeping.
Date: 2002-06-19
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: agricultural situation, aid to agriculture, apiculture, common agricultural policy, honey, plant health legislation, plant health product, plant health treatment, product quality

12.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 309 E/163

Reply

(8 October 2002)

The Council would refer the Honourable Member to the reply it gave to this question in Question Time at
the part-session in February 2002 (QH-963/01 put by Rosa Miguelez Ramos) and at the part-session in
March 2002 (QH-066/02 put by Camilo Nogueira Román).

(2002/C 309 E/190)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1804/02

by Dominique Souchet (NI) to the Commission

(19 June 2002)

Subject: Urgent action in support of beekeeping

The European Parliament recently adopted a resolution (Lannoye report (cid:1) A5-0155/2002) on type-
approval of plant-protection products, in paragraph 20 of which it ‘calls on the Commission to ensure that
the plant-protection product evaluation criteria explicitly include assessment of the impact which the
active substances have on domestic bee populations and the views of professional beekeepers organisations
regarding those substances’.

time required for the implementation of

The amount of
this resolution is incompatible with the
seriousness of the situation in which the beekeeping sector finds itself. This problem is largely due to a
catastrophic mortality rate caused by two systemic pesticides (cid:1) imidaclopride and fipronil (cid:1) which are
used to coat the seeds of arable crops and which (as proven by the French National Agricultural Research
Institute of Avignon-Montfavet (INRA) and the analyses carried out by the French National Scientific
Research Centre in Orléans (CNRS) showing the presence at toxic levels of imidaclopride in maize and
sunflower pollens) are harmful not only to the crops treated, but also to future crops since the active
substances remain in crop residues buried in the soil, and subsequently in the humus.

What action does the Commission intend to take, other than applying the precautionary principle, which
ought to have been applied as soon as doubts were raised, in order to prevent the harmful effects of these
two active substances?

What action has it taken in response to the Agriculture Council’s request of 18 February 2002 that it
adopt specific measures to resolve the serious crisis affecting the Community beekeeping sector?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(15 July 2002)

Article 4 of Council Directive 91/414/EEC of 15 July 1991 concerning the placing of plant protection
products on the market (1) requires Member States to ensure that authorised plant protection products do
not have an unacceptable impact on non-target species; such species include honey bees. As already stated
in the Commission answers to oral question H-0332/01 by Mr Bernié at question time during the
May 2001 session of Parliament (2) and oral question H-0082/01 by Mr Bernié at question time during the
February 2001 session of Parliament (3), both active substances to which the Honourable Member refers are
to be assessed under the Community review programme for existing active substances. Pending the
outcome of that assessment, Member States’ rules continue to apply.

Based on the information available, the Commission still considers immediate action at Community level
to be unnecessary. Member States are free to take appropriate measures in the event of particular concern
about certain uses. For example, as a precaution and in response to concern, France has suspended use of
imidacloprid on sunflowers and is carrying out an epidemiological study. The results will be taken into
account both in France’s own review and in the Community review programme. The Commission has not
so far received any scientific information on similar problems in other Member States. No other
Member State has authorised the use of imidacloprid on sunflowers. The Commission will monitor the
situation and, if necessary, take appropriate measures in due course.

C 309 E/164

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

12.12.2002

In February 2001 the Commission presented its report (4)
to the Council and Parliament on the
implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 1221/97 laying down general rules for the application of
measures to improve the production and marketing of honey (5).

In April 2001 the Commission adopted Regulation (EC) No 704/2001 (6) amending Regulation (EC)
No 2300/97 (7) on detailed rules to implement Council Regulation (EC) No 1221/97 laying down general
rules for the application of measures to improve the production and marketing of honey; the Council
deemed this to be satisfactory as a follow-up to the report.

In December 2001 Parliament adopted a resolution on the February 2001 Commission report and called
on the Commission to take seven steps in support of European beekeeping:
to set up a common
organisation of markets with direct income aid and a pollination premium; to include beekeeping in the
compensatory payments scheme provided for in Council Regulation (EC) No 1259/1999 of 17 May 1999
establishing common rules for direct support schemes under the common agricultural policy (8); to transfer
the varroasis control measure to veterinary legislation; to grant aid for promoting quality honey; to
increase the budget for, and the share of, Community part-financing; to adopt a harmonised and flexible
approach in implementing national programmes; and to grant aid for investment in restocking material.

In February 2002 the Council noted majority Member State support for a number of the measures
proposed by the Parliament resolution and called on the Commission to expand its activities in this sector.

The budget heading allocated to honey programmes has been increased by 10 % in 2002 and the
Commission has amended the Decisions relating to the programmes accordingly. This budgetary increase
has been maintained in the preliminary draft budget for next year.

Moreover, France’s 2001-2002 marketing year national programme (cid:1) which the Commission approved in
July 2001 (cid:1) provides for studies on how plant protection products affect honey quality. The 2002-2003
marketing year programme includes aid for investment in restocking material.

(1) OJ L 230, 19.8.1991 (as last amended by Commission Directive 2002/48/EC of 30 May 2002, OJ L 148,

6.6.2002).

(2) Written answer, 15.5.2001.
(3) Written answer, 13.2.2001.
(4) COM(2001) 70 final.
(5) OJ L 173, 1.7.1997 (as amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 2070/98 of 28 September 1998, OJ L 265,

30.9.1998).

(6) OJ L 98, 7.4.2001.
(7) OJ L 319, 21.11.1997.
(8) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999.

(2002/C 309 E/191)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1805/02

by Gabriele Stauner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Unlawful supplements to Commissioners’ salaries

(19 June 2002)

In the answer which he gave on behalf of the Commission to my Written Question P-1233/02 (1),
Mr Kinnock, Vice-President of the Commission, confirmed that, for many years now, Commissioners have
been benefiting from the opportunity to bump up their salaries by having a part thereof transferred not to
their bank account in their place of employment, Brussels, but to accounts in other EU countries, which
transfers qualify for beneficial weightings. The Commission also confirmed that Regulation No 422/67/EEC
of the Council (2), which determines the emoluments of members of the Commission and which is
applicable in this instance, includes no provisions which would authorise this practice.

In its defence, the Commission argues that, none the less, Parliament annually makes provision for such
transfers by entering the requisite additional appropriations in the budget.