WRITTEN QUESTION E-2280/02 by Emilia Müller (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Relaxing of the ban on the use of bonemeal in animal feed.
Date: 2002-07-24
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU Member State, cereal substitute, statistics, storage of waste, veterinary legislation

C 88 E/290

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

8.4.2004

Does the Commission consider this to be legitimate use of Objective 2 funding?

If so, under what conditions may a town/city or Land use such funding to ensure that it is successful when
competing against other towns/cities or Länder to attract companies looking for new sites?

If not, what action should, in its opinion, be taken in such cases?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(12 August 2002)

The Oberhausen town council has no authority with regard to the approval of projects for financial
support under the North Rhine Westphalia Objective 2 Single Programming Document (SPD). This
responsibility belongs only to the managing authority which is the regional government of North Rhine
Westphalia in this case.

Support
for private investments under the SPD is in general restricted to small and medium-sized
enterprises. As an exception, big companies can be supported where they contribute to building the
strength of the region, for example, under measure 2.8, ‘new energies’ or measure 3.4, ‘logistics’.

Decisions on company location are a responsibility for the management which must take into account all
the circumstances prevailing. Such decisions are unlikely to be influenced solely by opportunities for
financial support from public sources. In addition, all public support of this kind, whether it is of national
or Community origin, has to respect Community legislation concerning State aids.

With regard to the Structural Funds, the rules in force envisage two measures that are intended to limit the
effects of relocation for companies in receipt of EU support. First, in the Commission’s guidelines on
national regional aid (1), it is required that recipients of EU support must maintain, for a five-year period,
any investment or any jobs thus created. Secondly, Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June
1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds (2) stipulates that the contribution of
European funds in productive activities is conditional on the location of
these activities remaining
unchanged during five years following the decision to grant support.

(1) OJ C 74, 10.3.1998.
(2) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.

(2004/C 88 E/0297)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2280/02

by Emilia Müller (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(24 July 2002)

Subject: Relaxing of the ban on the use of bonemeal in animal feed

What is the exact quantity of old stocks of bonemeal in the EU and how are they distributed among the
individual Member States and their regions?

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88 E/291

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(25 September 2002)

In March 2001 the Commission carried out a questionnaire survey asking for details of disposal routes,
amounts of animal by-products (ABP) disposed of via each route, and costs. The survey was carried out in
order to monitor the level of increase in ABP, and its impact in particular on the storage and disposal
capacities of processed animal proteins (PAP), including meat-and-bone meal in Member States. Among
other things, the survey revealed the following stocks of PAP at that time:

Member States

Estimated amount of PAP stored in March 2001

(Tonnes)

Belgium

Denmark

Germany

Greece

Spain

France

Ireland

Italy

Luxembourg

The Netherlands

Austria

Portugal

Finland

Sweden

United Kingdom

14 000

56 000

27 453

5 000

4 194

200 000

100 000

30 000

0

75 000

< 1000

83 617

10 000

12 600

436 000

Luxembourg sends all his ABP to Belgium for rendering and therefore, has no stocks of PAP. Four Member
States (Greece, France,
the Netherlands and Portugal) and two Federal States in Germany (Baden-
Württemberg and Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania) indicated a shortage of storage capacity.

Recently, the Commission sent again a request for information to Member States. In particular, each
Member State was asked to submit formal plans on the manner in which stocks of meat-and-bone meal
are currently being handled, transported and stored and the plans for their disposal. The data was
requested for 30 August 2002. The Commission intends in due course to report on the responses to this
questionnaire and its implications.

(2004/C 88 E/0298)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2677/02

by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission

(24 September 2002)

Subject: Fire safety

What role does the Commission have in promoting best practice between Member States and their fire
authorities with a view to reducing death and injury from fire?