WRITTEN QUESTION E-2652/02 by Frank Vanhecke (NI) to the Commission. Customs agreements between ports and national authorities.
Date: 2002-09-20
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Belgium, EU relations, United States, approval, competition law, customs cooperation, harbour installation, interpretation of the law, maritime transport, single market, transport safety

8.5.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 110 E/81

authorities. If, in this particular case, the Commission finds that Community law has been breached, it will
not hesitate to take the required action against Greece. To facilitate its task, the Commission would ask the
Honourable Member to send it any relevant information he may have.

(1) OJ L 183, 29.6.1989.
(2)

Judgment of the Court of 13 June 2002, Commission v Hellenic Republic, case C-33/01, not yet published.

(2003/C 110 E/083)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2649/02

by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission

(20 September 2002)

Subject: Recreational fishing

According to the 28 August edition of the newspaper Diário de Noticias, the ADAPI (association of
industrial fishing-boat owners) estimates that there are more than 20 000 fishing boats operating in
Portugal, ostensibly engaged in recreational fishing, but actually fishing for commercial purposes.

Although these figures cannot of course be confirmed, experience nevertheless shows that this is a
substantial problem in Portugal, and is undoubtedly not confined to that country alone.

In view of the gradual exhaustion of fish stocks, does the Commission not consider it essential to make
provision for monitoring the recreational fishing sector, in order to avoid even more adverse consequences
for the sustainability of fisheries and the conditions of competition in European fisheries?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(18 October 2002)

The Commission does not possess at present and has no intention of instituting in the foreseeable future a
monitoring scheme for the recreational sector of fisheries.

Member States are obliged under existing Community legislation to ensure that all landings of regulated
fish stocks are accurately recorded and that these records are returned to appropriate authorities, including
the Commission.

(2003/C 110 E/084)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2652/02

by Frank Vanhecke (NI) to the Commission

(20 September 2002)

Subject: Customs agreements between ports and national authorities

The Antwerp Port Authority has concluded the requisite agreements with the US customs authorities
concerning the organisation of security in the port in order to obtain a security label
from those
authorities under which goods despatched from Antwerp are still admitted to US ports. Ports which do not
have such a label will no longer be permitted to despatch goods to the USA.

European Commissioner Palacio has expressed reservations about this. In her view, the fact that certain
European ports are obtaining security labels (in this case, Antwerp) while others are not may constitute a
breach of European competition provisions.

However, agreements between authorities (the port of Antwerp and the US customs) on the subject of
security fall within the ambit of national sovereignty.

To what extent is the Commission prepared to review its previous position on this matter?

C 110 E/82

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

8.5.2003

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(6 November 2002)

The Union had full knowledge early on of the United States’
officials to certain European ports, including Antwerp.

initiative of sending American customs

This initiative by the US is part of a broader approach to the security of maritime transport worldwide,
involving more than just the Member States in question. It focuses in particular on customs procedures
applied to exports and incorporating appropriate controls. The Community’s response therefore needs to
meet two fundamental requirements: it must be comprehensive, so as to fit into a global approach, and it
must meet the requirements of our internal market, particularly by ensuring equal treatment for all our
exporters.

improved geographical
The singling out of certain ports also runs counter to the Union’s goal of
distribution of
flows to relieve congestion on the already saturated road network. The
Commission continues to believe that an uncoordinated approach such as this which fails to provide an
overall response to the problem is not the best approach to the problem of security.

transport

The Commission would also point out that the Community has concluded an Agreement with the United
States on customs cooperation and mutual assistance in customs matters (1), Article 3 of which stipulates
that ‘the Contracting Parties may by mutual consent expand this Agreement with a view to increasing the
in accordance with their respective customs
levels of customs cooperation and supplementing them,
legislation, by means of agreements on specific sectors or matters.’

As well as proposing close coordination with the United States with a view, ultimately, to arriving at
in a few
mutual recognition agreements introducing proper security standards, the Commission will
months also be putting forward a proposal on implementing and monitoring all appropriate security
measures in all the Union’s international merchant ports, based on the regulations approved by the
International Maritime Organisation (IMO).

Recent talks between the Commission and the American authorities have been encouraging and have
raised hopes that in the medium term a greater guarantee of security will be provided on both sides of the
Atlantic, in line with the international trade arrangements entered into by the Union and the United States.

(1) Council Decision 97/541/EC of 21 May 1997 concerning the conclusion of the agreement between the European
Community and the United States of America on customs cooperation and mutual assistance in customs matters;
OJ L 222, 12.8.1997.

(2003/C 110 E/085)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2661/02

by Patricia McKenna (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(23 September 2002)

Subject: Project for regeneration of Almadrava and Les Devesses beaches, Denia, Alicante

The fishermen of Denia (Autonomous Community of Valencia) have denounced a project of public works
by the Spanish Ministry of the Environment (28/1126/96) which has already been contracted. This project
is apparently receiving EU funding. This project is called ‘Proyecto de Recuperación del Entorno Natural de
la Playas de la Almadrava y Les Devesses de Denia, Alicante’. According to the fishermen of Denia, this
project violates Directives 79/409/EEC (1) (Birds), 92/43/EEC (2) (Habitat), 97/11/EC (3) (Environment Impact
Assessment) and 90/313/EEC (4) (Access to Environmental Information) as it seriously affects protected
marine and bird habitats, ignoring the need for environmental impact studies and not giving citizens free
access to environmental information.

The case was denounced in a petition to the European Parliament in July 2000 (Petition 472/2000, by
Juan José Camarena Llopis on behalf of the ‘Cofradia de Pescadores de Denia’, the Fishermen’s Association
of Denia). The petition was considered on 10 November 2000, by Parliament’s Petitions Committee and