WRITTEN QUESTION E-3305/02 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Commission delegation.
Date: 2002-11-21
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Greece, environmental protection, infringement of EU law, protected species, protection of animal life, reptile, wildlife

3.7.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 155 E/133

(2003/C 155 E/146)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3301/02

by Francesco Fiori (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(21 November 2002)

Subject: Ukrainian wheat

As a result of the Council meeting of 15 July 2002, the option of taking into account the official price of
common wheat in Odessa for certain fodder varieties was definitively dropped. These kinds of wheat are
therefore now worth USD 75 per tonne, whilst US wheat, which serves as the basis for calculating import
duty, is USD 110 per tonne. If no action is taken, Ukrainian wheat will continue to enter the Union at
extremely competitive prices, i.e. USD 45 less.

In view of this worrying situation, what steps will the Commission take to introduce, as a matter of the
greatest urgency, adequate and necessary measures to re-establish Community preference?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(9 January 2003)

To resolve the external protection difficulties in the cereal sector, inputs having risen to record levels, the
Commission has decided to introduce from 1 January 2003 the new import quota arrangements for low
and medium-quality common wheat and for barley that will replace the existing ceiling system. The new
arrangements have been negotiated with the Union’s trading partners in line with the provisions made by
Article XXVIII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. External protection is re-established but all
suppliers’ possibilities of exportation to the Community are retained.

For medium and low quality common wheat a quota of 2 981 600 tonnes at EUR 12 tonne duty rate will
be opened. Within it the United States and Canada will have national quotas of 572 000 tonnes and
38 000 tonnes respectively. All other suppliers,
including Ukraine and Russia, will have access to the
balance of 2 371 600 tonnes. Outside the quota bound duty of EUR 95 tonne applies.

For malting barley a quota of 50 000 tonnes a duty of EUR 8/tonne will be opened. Quality criteria and
processing provisions will apply. For other types of barley a quota of 300 000 tonnes duty of EUR 16/
tonne will be opened. Outside the quota the bound duty of EUR 93/tonne applies.

For all other cereals the present system continues whereby customs duties on importation into the Union
are calculated on the basis of the American grain exchange prices considered representative of world
market prices.

(2003/C 155 E/147)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3305/02

by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(21 November 2002)

Subject: Commission delegation

On 3 September a delegation from the Directorate-General
for the Environment held a meeting in
Zakynthos with local authority and government representatives concerning the loggerhead turtle (caretta
caretta). Can the Commission say what was the outcome of this meeting? Did the delegation uncover any
infringements of Community law?

C 155 E/134

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.7.2003

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(7 January 2003)

From 3 to 5 September 2002, a Commission delegation visited the island of Zakynthos in order to check
whether all necessary measures had been taken to protect the loggerhead sea turtle Caretta caretta and
comply with the judgment of the Court of Justice of 30 January 2002 (1). The Court had found that Greece
had failed to comply with the requirements of Article 12(1)(b) and (d) of Directive 92/43/EEC (2).

The Commission delegation noted that progress had been made and the situation was better than in
previous years. However, it concluded that Greece had not done everything necessary to comply with the
Court’s judgment, which required it to establish and implement an effective system of strict protection for
the loggerhead sea turtle. The Greek authorities were informed of the results of the visit.

The Commission will not hesitate to take appropriate measures to ensure that Greece complies with the
judgment delivered by the Court on 30 January 2002 in the Caretta caretta case.

(1)

Judgment of the Court of 30 January 2002, Commission v Hellenic Republic, Case C-103/00, European Court
Reports 2002, p. 1147.

(2) Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (cid:1)

OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

(2003/C 155 E/148)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3314/02

by Bill Newton Dunn (ELDR) to the Commission

(22 November 2002)

Subject: Testing the carcinogenic properties of man-made vitreous fibres

In the Commission Directive 97/69/EC (1) of 5 December 1997, the Commission committed itself to
‘evaluate scientific developments’ of man-made vitreous fibres, within five years. This deadline has now run
out. Are the results of the tests to ascertain the carcinogenic or other properties of man-made vitreous
fibres known, and if they are, what are the results of these tests?

(1) OJ L 343, 13.12.1997, p. 19.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(27 January 2003)

Commission Directive 97/69/EC of 5 December 1997 (1) provides that the Commission shall evaluate
scientific developments within five years after adoption, in order to delete or amend Note Q. This Note
names four different toxicology tests which can be used to exempt mineral wool from the classification as
carcinogenic.

Since the adoption of the Directive in 1997, the complete scientific-technical evidence on which Note Q is
based was re-analysed. This analysis, published in two scientific articles (2) (3), showed that the results
the
generated by the four different
biopersistence of mineral wool
it is
important to note that the International Association for Research on Cancer (IARC) revised a review on
fibres (4), which again noted the importance of biopersistence and its relationship to carcinogenic effects.

It also highlighted the link of
In this context,

fibres with their classification as carcinogenic.

tests were highly consistent.