WRITTEN QUESTION E-1920/02 by Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Commission gifts.
Date: 2002-07-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Commission, European Commissioner, access to EU information, administration of the Institutions, diplomatic relations, duties of civil servants, protocol

12.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 309 E/173

The safety of these products is guaranteed by their conformity to European marketing standards. However,
safety can only be guaranteed when the conditions of use specified by the manufacturer are observed.

At present, the Commission has no plans specifically to research this area.

(2002/C 309 E/201)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1920/02

by Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(3 July 2002)

Subject: Commission gifts

A recent news article reported that Commissioners will not disclose a full list of gifts along with the gifts’
donors ‘or protocol and diplomatic reasons, and so as to avoid any potential embarrassment for foreign
officials’.

Is this, indeed, the Commission policy?

What are the protocol and diplomatic reasons for not declaring gifts’ donors?

Would the Commission care to expand on its reasons for not wanting to embarrass foreign officials giving
personal gifts to Commissioners or Commission staff?

Would it not be Commission policy,
transparency’, to publish a list of gifts and donors on the Commission website?

its commendable commitment

in light of

to ‘openness and

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(23 September 2002)

The Code of Conduct for Commissioners states that they shall not accept gifts of a value greater than
EUR 150. When, in accordance with standard diplomatic usage, they do receive gifts whose value exceeds
that amount, they hand them over to the Commission’s Protocol Service.

On the occasion of exploratory talks preceding a visit of a high level personality to the Commission,
Protocol discourages any presentation of gifts. Nevertheless,
in accordance with their traditions, some
visitors insist on presenting a gift in memory of their visit.

To publish a list of gifts containing the names of the donors would cause embarrassment to those visitors
who, acting on advice, did not present any gift.

These gifts are mostly objects which represent local arts or crafts or which are personalised, for example
engraved with the name of the donor, the recipient or the occasion.

As mentioned above, gifts of a value greater than EUR 150 are handed over to the Protocol Service. It is
often a difficult and highly subjective task to determine whether a very typical gift is of a value (market or
usage value?) greater than EUR 150.

Since only the latter must be notified to the Protocol Service, some donors might take offence at not
seeing their gift on the list.

It can sometimes be very difficult to describe a particular gift, to define its usage or to find a reference to
the artist that produced it (in the case of engravings or paintings).

A significant number of gifts are put into storage, some adorn the corridors, offices and rooms of the
Commission, while other, non-personalised gifts are given to charities.

C 309 E/174

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

12.12.2002

Nevertheless, the Commission wants to be better able, within the constraints of its protocol and diplomatic
obligations, to respond to requests for information submitted by interested persons. Consequently,
it
intends to take measures to ensure that, in future, the kind of information to which the Honourable
Member refers is more easily accessible.

(2002/C 309 E/202)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1925/02

by Guido Sacconi (PSE) to the Commission

(3 July 2002)

Subject: Use of purifying muds in agriculture

A ministerial decree adopted in Italy on 7 December 2001 sets out a list of fertilisers including ‘integrated
hide’, a product obtained ‘from a mixture of hide and proteic muds stabilised by the tanning cycle’.

It is stated in the preamble to this decree that ‘the opinion of the European Commission has been taken
into account’.

Production of such a ‘fertiliser’ would lead to the use in agriculture of purifying muds of obviously
industrial origin, free of qualitative or quantitative restrictions, with no registration of their use and with
no preventive analysis of the soil concerned. This would be in flagrant breach of the spirit and letter of
Council Directive 86/278/EEC (1) of 12 June 1986 (incorporated into Italian law by Decree-Law 99/1992).

The free movement of goods would also mean that this ‘fertiliser’ could be marketed and used throughout
the Union.

Can the Commission confirm:

1. whether a favourable opinion has been given regarding the adoption of this provision?

2.

If so, can it explain the terms in which that opinion was expressed?

3. Does the Commission intend to intervene to prevent the inappropriate use of purifying muds in

agriculture?

(1) OJ L 181, 4.7.1986, p. 6.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(5 August 2002)

In the context of the notification procedure provided for by Directive 98/34/EC (1) of the Parliament
1.
and of the Council of 22 June 1998 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field
of technical standards and regulations, Italy notified a draft decree amending Annexes 1B and 3 of Act
No 748 of 19 October 1984 (the Italian Fertiliser Act).

The Commission received this notification (2) on 14 March 2000 and did not react to it. The absence
2.
of reaction in the framework of the above mentioned notification procedure does not mean approval of
the notified draft;
the measure may reveal problems of
compatibility with Community law.
It has also to be added that Article 8, paragraph 5 of Directive
98/34/EC provides that ‘the absence of reaction from the Commission under this Directive to a draft
technical regulation shall not prejudice any decision which might be taken under other Community acts’.

the practical application of

for example,

Council Directive 86/278/EEC (3) of 12 June 1986 on the protection of the environment, and in
3.
particular of the soil, when sewage sludge is used in agriculture defines sludge as ‘residual sludge from
sewage plants treating domestic or urban waste waters and from other sewage plants treating waste waters
of a composition similar to domestic and urban waste waters’ (Article 2(a)(i) of the Directive).

Industrial waste waters, such as those originating from a tannery, cannot be regarded as domestic or urban
waste waters. Neither can they be considered of a composition similar to domestic and urban waste water.