WRITTEN QUESTION P-1609/03 by Claude Moraes (PSE) to the Commission. Human Trafficking Experts Group.
Date: 2003-05-07
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: advisory committee (EU), competence of the institution, consultancy, operation of the Institutions, trafficking in human beings

6.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 33 E/143

stipulated in the Directive for existing installations (28 December 2005). Slovakia has been granted a
transition period until the end of 2006 to reach compliance for a limited number of existing incinerators.
As regards the preceding Council Directive 94/67/EC of 16 December 1994 on the incineration of
hazardous waste (2), Hungary was granted a transition period until 30 June 2005 for certain emission limit
values and measurements within a limited number of incinerators.

The Commission cannot indicate the share that expired pesticides account for in the request from seven
Acceding and Candidate Countries for inventory works (3) on persistent organic pollutants related
contamination nor does the Commission know the share that constitutes of the total amount of obsolete
pesticides in general. This falls under the scope of the Stockholm Convention on persistent organic
pollutants, as it was outlined in the reply to Written Question P-0480/03 by the Honourable Member.
According to a survey (4) made in the 10 acceding countries, the share of POP pesticides seems to vary a
great deal from one country to another. In the four acceding countries with large stocks of obsolete
pesticides, the estimated share of POPs waste varies from 1,4 % to 30 %.

The responsibility and initiative for receiving financial aid for the destruction of expired pesticides clearly
has to be taken by the Acceding and Candidate Countries themselves. It is their obligation to transpose and
implement the acquis at the latest by their accession to the Union, with the above mentioned limited
exceptions. The Commission is closely monitoring their preparations, as well as assisting them in
evaluating the scope of the problem. In this context, the Commission commissioned the above-mentioned
study. Community financial instruments such as PHARE and ISPA are in principle available to properly
manage obsolete pesticides in the Candidate Countries subject to the specific conditions stipulated for these
instruments. After accession, they will have access to the Structural and Cohesion Funds for this purpose.

(1) OJ L 332, 28.12.2000.
(2) OJ L 365, 31.12.1994.
(3) More information about the regarding proposals can be found on the WebPages http://www.gefonline.org/.
(4) European Commission, Directorate General for Environment,

‘Obsolete Pesticides Status in Candidate Countries’.

Final report. September 2002.

(2004/C 33 E/141)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1609/03

by Claude Moraes (PSE) to the Commission

(7 May 2003)

Subject: Human Trafficking Experts Group

Can the Commission please give me details on the purpose and remit of its ‘Human Trafficking Experts
Group’?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(3 June 2003)

On 25 March 2003, the Commission adopted Decision 2003/209/EC setting up a consultative group to be
known as the ‘Experts Group on Trafficking in Human Beings’ (1).

The experts group shall be an important element for the implementation of the Brussels Declaration. This
document was the final outcome of European Conference on Prevention and Combating Trafficking in
Human Beings (cid:1) Global Challenge for the 21st Century from 18 to 20 September 2002. It includes an
annex of recommendations, standards and best practices. The experts group shall contribute substantively
to the further development of the prevention of and the fight against trafficking in human beings.
According to Article 2 of the Decision, the Commission may consult the experts group on any matter
relating to trafficking in human beings.
In particular, a report of the experts group based on the
recommendations of the Brussels Declaration shall be submitted within a period of nine months following
the setting up of the group in order to assist the Commission with a view to launching further concrete
proposals at Union level, for example an action plan or a communication.

C 33 E/144

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

6.2.2004

The group shall consist of 20 experts. The Commission shall appoint the group members from a list made
up of all persons proposed by governments of Member States and Candidate Countries as well as by
specific international,
inter-governmental and non-governmental organisations. The Commission shall
publish the list of members for information in the Official Journal of the European Union.

the Commission Decision,

According to Article 5 of
there shall be no remuneration for the tasks
performed by the members of the experts group. Travel expenses will be reimbursed following the rules
for consultative committees (A-07031). Four plenary meetings of the experts group as well as four
working party meetings (possible according to Article 6 of the Commission Decision) per year might be
to budgetary
necessary. However,
requirements as well as to the view of the group once established.

the number of meetings may have to be reconsidered further

(1) OJ L 79, 26.3.2003.

(2004/C 33 E/142)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1611/03

by Jean-Louis Bernié (EDD) to the Commission

(7 May 2003)

Subject: Marketing of cereals

Apart from in France, the marketing of cereals in the European Union is not regulated; farmers can sell
their produce freely and can ensure that it is perfectly traceable, in contrast to the produce of giant silos.

In France, the marketing function is a monopoly held by the storage agencies licensed by the National
Cereals Trades Board (ONIC), and it is compulsory for all cereal trade to be channelled through them. The
approved collectors deduct
for the
operation of ONIC, which gives them financial support.

the parafiscal charges which are needed, amongst other things,

This situation means that producers and users of French cereals are penalised both financially and in
respect of their ability to trade freely. For example, a French cereals producer is not allowed to sell his
produce directly to a breeder.

The rules imposed by ONIC therefore appear to constitute a barrier to Community trade and freedom of
trade.

What does the Commission think of this typically French situation?

Does it have any suggestions for resolving it?

Supplementary answer
given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(25 July 2003)

The Commission’s information is that the system of approved collectors as introduced by Order No 67-
812 of 22 September 1967 to replace the storage agency system in order to enable France to comply with
her obligations under the common organisation of the cereals market following entry into force of
Regulation No 120/67/EEC (1) sets non-discriminatory terms of access to the activity of collector aimed at
the general
interest and does not interfere with the purposes of the common organisation of cereal
markets.

The system is designed both to protect
the grower, by
guaranteeing immediate payment for the cereals and correctness of transactions and to ensure that cereal
quality is preserved during the subsequent marketing stages. It also affords reliable statistical monitoring of
the cereals market and is a means of securing payment of the parafiscal charges owed by growers. Lastly,
the approved collectors are in
in retaining the grower’s freedom to choose the buyer, given that

the weaker of the contracting parties,

i.e.