WRITTEN QUESTION E-1183/03 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Shifting traffic flows in air transport as a result of subsidised cooperation between regional airports and new entrants to the market.
Date: 2003-04-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: State aid, air traffic, air transport, airport, common transport policy, inter-company agreement, organisation of transport, restriction on competition, transport company

C 268 E/178

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

7.11.2003

The scope of Article 6(1)(f) covers former foodstuffs of animal origin, other than catering waste, which are
no longer intended for human consumption for commercial reasons or due to problems of manufacturing
or packaging defects or other defects which do not present any risk to humans or animals. Therefore, the
Commission considers that the scope of that Article is not intended to cover for instance, bakery products
(such as waste bread, cakes, pastry, biscuits), pasta, chocolate, sweet and similar products which do not
contain and have not been in contact with animal carcases, parts of animal carcases or products of animal
origin (other than, for instance, rennet or melted fat, milk or egg which have been incorporated into
another those products but which do not constitute the main characteristic ingredient, and which do not
contain fresh meat, meat products or meat preparations). Consequently, the processing, use and disposal of
these bakery products is outside the scope of the Regulation.

Discussion with experts from Member States in the framework of the Standing Committee on the Food
Chain and Animal Health has revealed that there are varying ways of collection, uses and disposal of
former foodstuffs, ranging from transformation into feeds, composting and treatment in biogas plants to
landfill, depending on local circumstances.

The Commission does not intend at present to carry out a specific study on the collection and treatment of
former foodstuffs, but will produce a report on the basis of information expected from Member States on
general compliance with the Regulation towards the end of the year 2003. If appropriate, such a report
will be accompanied by legislative proposals.

Furthermore, in the context of the adoption of the implementing and transitional measures for Regulation
(EC) No 1774/2002, the Commission has undertaken to present a proposal to clarify the scope of
Article 6(1)(f) to the next meeting of the SCoFCAH, and proposed to grant to Member States a limited
derogation (subject to a number of conditions), until 31 December 2004, in relation to the composting
and treatment in biogas plants of Category 3 materials. As former foodstuff containing products of animal
origin is a Category 3 material, this derogation will allow Member States to continue to use national rules
for the composting and treatment in a biogas plant of former foodstuff.

(2003/C 268 E/202)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1183/03

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(1 April 2003)

Subject: Shifting traffic flows in air transport as a result of subsidised cooperation between regional airports

and new entrants to the market

1.
Does the Commission recall that, over the past few decades, large airports were built 10 to 40 km
from large cities, easily accessible by a direct connection to the rail network from the city and its sphere of
influence within a radius of several hundred km?

2.
Is the Commission aware that new airlines are mostly creating connections between airports at
former military bases, or near smaller cities, leading to a shift in international passenger flows away from
central airports sited near large conurbations and railway stations towards places which are completely
dependent on road transport to and from the airport, just as airports used to be in the old days.

3.
Is the Commission aware that there is increased cooperation between formerly unimportant regional
airports and new airlines, with each becoming dependent on the other, because the airports are looking for
new customers and the new entrants to the airline market want to keep their costs down?

7.11.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 268 E/179

To what extent is the small airports’ offer to cut-price airlines to use their runways and airport
4.
facilities, at a low price compared with conventional airports, made possible by the use of public funds by
the local authorities or regional governments concerned? Does this constitute prohibited state aid or
distortion of competition?

5. What measures is the Commission taking to encourage international, and in particular inter-
continental, flights to remain or become concentrated at airports sited near large conurbations with good
rail connections?

6. What measures is the Commission taking to encourage regional airports to be used exclusively for
the needs of local towns and regions located far from a central airport, rather than as a cheap and
inconvenient competitor to central airports?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(15 May 2003)

The Commission is aware of the existence of rail
However, not all large Union airports are directly linked to a rail net.

links to notably the larger airports in the Union.

The Commission is aware of the recent developments in the air transport sector within the Union
including the emerging of the so called ‘low cost carriers’ which for a number of reasons have a cost
structure different from the incumbent air carriers. Some of these low cost carriers, but not all, concentrate
their activities on other than the large airports in the Union. There are no indications that because of these
developments international passenger flows are being diverted generally. Rather, the flights offered by low
cost carriers respond to a changing and increasing demand of the travelling public for a new type of air
services: direct point-to-point flights with significantly reduced customer service, which are not booked
through a travel agent but via internet. The Commission notes that the new situation in air transport is
also the result of an open market access regime where operators and customers can take decisions serving
their best own interests.

To what extent air carriers can use smaller airports against lower air charges than are considered normal is
not easy to say as agreed reductions to the official tariffs or special conditions are not always public
knowledge, and as the Commission is not systematically informed about such cases either. Whether in
specific cases State aids are involved and competition is distorted, has to be judged on a case by case basis.
In the case of Ryanair, which has allegedly received favourable commercial operating conditions from the
Walloon authorities and the airport of Charleroi under which conditions the carrier now operates to
Charleroi, the Commission has taken the decision to open a formal investigation whether the State aids
involved violate Article 87 EC of the EC Treaty. The investigation is currently in progress.

The Commission’s policy is not aimed at encouraging air carriers to deploy their commercial activities to
one or the other particular category of airports. The choice for such airports is the result of commercial
considerations by air carriers in a liberal market regime. It is not for the Commission to interfere in such
decisions as long as Community law is fully respected.

(2003/C 268 E/203)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1241/03

by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission

(2 April 2003)

Subject: Food labelling

What information is required by European law to be provided on food labels in all Member States?

What discretion do individual Member States have to insist upon additional information being provided?