WRITTEN QUESTION E-0654/03 by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission. Mozambique sugar farmers.
Date: 2003-03-05
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Mozambique, common commercial policy, import policy, market access, obstacle to development, quantitative restriction, sugar, sugar industry

C 33 E/62

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

6.2.2004

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(7 April 2003)

The Commission is well aware of the post-war Czechoslovak legislation relating to members of the
Hungarian and German minorities living in the Czechoslovak Republic. The Commission has conducted a
thorough analysis of the relevant decrees issued by the Czechoslovak president and related laws of the
years 1945 and 1946, as well as related aspects regarding the restitution legislation of the Czech(oslovak)
Republic of the 1990s.

in question cannot be applied anymore. Certain discriminatory elements

The Summary Findings of the Commission’s analysis, which were presented to the public on 18 October
2002, do not show any obstacles to accession in the light of the acquis communautaire, as the decrees and
laws
in the relevant
Czech(oslovak) restitution legislation with regard to confiscated property have not been found to be in
contradiction with the acquis since all deadlines for filing new claims have expired. The Commission is
grateful to the Honourable Member for pointing out that the law on forced labour he refers to has long
ceased to apply.

The Commission cannot engage in a debate as to whether or not any given law on forced labour was
applied in accordance with the same law’s proper stipulations, at any given moment in history prior to the
first European Community’s coming into existence whether in an EU Member State or third country. The
Commission recalls that article 5 of the Charter of Fundamental Human Rights of the European Union
strictly prohibits any form of slavery or forced or compulsory labour, that is, irrespective of circumstances.

The Commission recalls that both the European Parliament and the European Council have repeatedly
endorsed the Commission’s view that the Slovak Republic fulfils the Copenhagen Criteria and will be able
to fully implement and enforce the acquis communautaire by the date of accession. The Community has
no competencies regarding matters of restitution or compensation for historical injustices. Member States
may choose to set certain conditions or limitations to such measures as they see fit, provided the latter do
not conflict with other applicable Community law such as the principle of non-discrimination.

The Commission appreciates all efforts by current and future Member States to address the burden and
injustices of the past, and encourages them to persist in these efforts. The Communities have been founded
on the common determination to overcome former tensions between the peoples of Europe. By addressing
these questions of a moral and psychological nature, they contribute to the strengthening of our Union of
mutual respect and understanding.

(2004/C 33 E/058)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0654/03

by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(5 March 2003)

Subject: Mozambique sugar farmers

Is the Commission aware of the devastating effect the 8 000-tonne import quota imposed on sugar exports
from Mozambique is having on Mozambican inhabitants?

Mozambique has the means to produce as much as 30 000 tonnes of sugar for export to European
countries. However, they are unable to do so owing to the strict import quota. Sugar factories in
Mozambique are prepared to fund small-scale farmers to buy equipment to enable them to produce sugar
from their rich farmland, therefore alleviating the dependence of Mozambicans on EU aid. However, the
quotas imposed are restricting this possibility.

Is the Commission prepared to review and increase the quota, beyond the proposed 15 % increase,
imposed on Mozambique sugar imports? Will the Commission make every effort to open up the market to
Mozambique, therefore empowering its people to rebuild their economy and in turn reduce the need for
international aid?

6.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 33 E/63

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(26 March 2003)

Mozambique had no access to the Community’s sugar market before the ‘Everything But Arms’ (EBA)
initiative. This initiative has, therefore, offered them new preferential export opportunities and has played
an important part in the revival of the sector after civil war and flood.

Mozambique will be able to export unlimited quantities of sugar to the Community from 2009.
Meanwhile, transitional arrangements apply: they participate in the EBA quota which increases year on
year by 15 % from 74 185 tonnes in 2001-2002 to 197 355 tonnes in 2008-2009. These transitional
arrangements were necessary to allow the Community to undertake the necessary internal adjustments
necessary to cope with increased EBA imports.

It would be inadvisable for the sugar sector to rely solely on access to one foreign market: for development
reasons, all export opportunities should be considered. Mozambique is thus starting to export to other
markets both within the Southern African Development Community (SADC) region and to the United
States, which should further help Mozambican sugar farmers.

(2004/C 33 E/059)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0655/03

by Bill Miller (PSE) to the Commission

(5 March 2003)

Subject: EU/Norway Anti-Dumping Agreement

If the Commission backs the decision by the Anti-Dumping Committee to abandon the EU/Norway
Agreement, will the Commission be prepared to monitor the situation immediately, especially with regard
to independent salmon farmers?

Would the Commission accept that if there is a marked deterioration in the livelihood of the independent
salmon farmers, then reimposing a ban on the dumping of salmon would have to be considered not just
on Norway, but also Chile and the Faroe Islands?

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(31 March 2003)

On 20 December 2002, the Commission made disclosure to the parties concerned of the essential facts
and considerations on the basis of which it was proposed to terminate the review of the anti-dumping and
countervailing measures applicable to imports of farmed Atlantic salmon originating in Norway and the
anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of the same product originating in Chile and the Faeroe
Islands without the application of trade defence measures.

In accordance with the relevant Community legislation, the parties concerned were given the opportunity
to make written submissions to the Commission on the substance of the proposal. The Commission also
sought
the opinion of Member States’ delegates to the Anti-dumping and Anti-subsidy Advisory
Committee regarding the proposal as it is required to do by the same Community legislation. The
opinions expressed by Member States’ delegates to the Committee and discussions taking place in that
body are confidential.

it should be made clear that the proposal as presented to the Committee concerned the
However,
termination of the existing measures applicable to imports of farmed Atlantic salmon from Norway and
not the so-called ‘Union/Norway Salmon Agreement.’ This agreement, which was signed in 1997 between
the Commission and the Norwegian Government and which came to an end on 28 February 2003,
provided amongst other things a forum for an exchange of views between the signatories on the state of
the market for salmon in the Community. The measures in place at the present time on the other hand,