WRITTEN QUESTION E-3600/02 by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. State of implementation by the EU Member States of the ERIKA legislative package.
Date: 2002-12-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EC Regulation, European Commission, drafting of EU law, marine pollution, oil pollution, proposal (EU), tanker, technical regulations

9.10.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 242 E/65

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-3597/02 and E-3598/02
given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(26 February 2003)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answers to parliamentary questions H-0848/
02 (1), E-3362/02 and E-3404/02 (2), E-3439/02 (3), E-3590/02 (4), E-3591/02 (5), E-3593/02 (6), E-3594/
02 (7), E-3599/02 (7)OJ C 161 E, 10.7.2003, p. 111, E-3602/02, E-3603/02 and E-3604/02 (8), E-3655/02
and E-3656/02 (9) and P-0001/03 (10), which cover all aspects of the Prestige disaster, including the issues
of ‘compensation’ and ‘costs’ raised by the Honourable Member.

(1) Written answer given on 14.1.2003.
(2) OJ C 161 E, 10.7.2003, p. 85.
(3) OJ C 161 E, 10.7.2003, p. 90.
(4) OJ C 222 E, 18.9.2003, p. 91.
(5) OJ C 222 E, 18.9.2003, p. 92.
(6) OJ C 161 E, 10.7.2003, p. 110.
(7) OJ C 161 E, 10.7.2003, p. 111.
(8) OJ C 192 E, 14.8.2003, p. 124.
(9) OJ C 161 E, 10.7.2003, p. 123.
(10) OJ C 161 E, 10.7.2003, p. 166.

(2003/C 242 E/067)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3600/02

by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(13 December 2002)

Subject: State of implementation by the EU Member States of the ‘ERIKA’ legislative package

What is the state of play as regards implementation by the EU Member States of the ‘ERIKA’ legislative
package? Which were the Member States that, at a certain moment, blocked an agreement to bring
implementation forward? On what grounds did they justify such a position?

(2003/C 242 E/068)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3660/02

by Rosa Miguélez Ramos (PSE) to the Commission

(18 December 2002)

Subject: Black tide in Galicia: statements by the Transport Commissioner

During the debate at Parliament’s plenary sitting of 21 November 2002, the Transport Commissioner
called the Member State governments an illogical bunch because they said at the Nice summit two years
ago that the implementation of the ERIKA I and II packages of legislation should be brought forward, and
then failed to apply them. The Commissioner stated that, if the governments had not delayed bringing the
measures proposed by the Commission into force, the Prestige accident would not have happened.

Can the Commission say which States opposed the adoption in the Council of Ministers of the proposals
and deadlines put forward by the Commission in the ERIKA I and ERIKA II packages of legislation?

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-3600/02 and E-3660/02
given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(7 February 2003)

The Honourable Members are reminded how the Commission deplored the fact that the initially proposed
timetable for phasing out single-hull tankers was not retained. The proposal would have meant category 1
single-hull tankers such as the ERIKA or the Prestige being phased out at 23 years of age.