WRITTEN QUESTION E-1624/03 by Patricia McKenna (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Designatiin of nitrate-vulnerable zones in Ireland.
Date: 2003-05-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU financing, Ireland, aid to agriculture, application of EU law, pollution control measures, pollution from agricultural sources

13.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65 E/87

(2004/C 65 E/097)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1623/03

by Patricia McKenna (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

Subject: Implementation of EU Directives by Ireland

(13 May 2003)

Ireland has yet to implement EU Directive 91/676/EEC (1) and has not set limits on the spreading of slurry
and fertilisers on farmland in order to protect water quality. Ireland is the only Member State not to have
done so.

What steps is the Commission taking to ensure that Ireland complies with this directive? Does the
Commission agree that Ireland has a history of non-implementation of EU environmental legislation and
that strong action is now needed to ensure that such legislation is quickly and properly enforced?

(1) OJ L 375, 31.12.1991, p. 1.

(2004/C 65 E/098)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1624/03

by Patricia McKenna (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

Subject: Designatiin of nitrate-vulnerable zones in Ireland

(13 May 2003)

Ireland has yet to designate nitrate-vulnerable zones as required by the Nitrates Directive 91/676/EEC (1).
Two years ago the then Minister for the Environment promised to do so, but nothing has happened. What
steps is the Commission taking to ensure that Ireland meets its obligations under the Nitrates Directive?
Is the Commission threatening to withhold farm support payments unless Ireland complies? Has the Irish
Government provided details of remedial measures proposed and a timescale for their implementation?

(1) OJ L 375, 31.12.1991, p. 1.

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-1622/03, E-1623/03 and E-1624/03
given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(26 June 2003)

The Commission is committed to ensuring that all Member States, including Ireland, comply with the
requirements of Council Directive 91/676/EEC of 12 December 1991 concerning the protection of waters
against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources. On 10 October 2001, it referred Ireland to
the Court of Justice for failure to comply with these requirements (1). More specifically, the Commission
drew attention to the lack of designation of nitrate vulnerable zones and the failure to establish action
programmes for these. A decision of the Court is awaited.

With reference to Community funds and in particular rural development
(Council Regulation (EC)
No 1257/1999 of 17 May 1999 on support for rural development from the European Agricultural
Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) (2), Commission guidelines in relation to the implementation of
Directive 91/676/EEC were sent to Member States in May 2000. These guidelines required that for relevant
countries, the rural development programming documents must contain clear and irrevocable commit-
ments to guarantee consistency of their programmes with the protection of vulnerable zones as provided
for under Directive 91/676/EEC.

Rural development programming documents were required to include:

(cid:1) a commitment to make substantial progress in completing the designation of nitrate vulnerable zones

as soon as possible;

C 65 E/88

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

13.3.2004

(cid:1) a commitment to make sufficient progress in defining and implementing the binding measures of the
nitrates code of good farming practice (GFP) and/or the action programme and adapting and/or
completing the general GFP as defined in Commission Regulation (EC) No 1750/1999 of 23 July
1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 (3)
accordingly.

In the guidelines, the Commission indicated that it would be formally notifying Member States when it was
about to take immediate and appropriate action in the event of irregularities concerning the conditions of
implementation, in accordance with Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 and Council Regulation (EC)
No 1258/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the financing of the common agricultural policy (2), i.e. in this case
specifically a failure to comply with the commitment to designate nitrate vulnerable zones.

Ireland undertook these commitments in its Rural Development Plan approved by the Commission by the
end of 2001.

On 23 February 2003, the Irish authorities communicated their intention to apply an action programme
throughout the territory of Ireland, as permitted under Article 3(5) of Directive 91/676/EEC.
It was
indicated that an action programme would be developed by June 2003.

With reference to derogations, it is premature to comment, since the action programme from which any
derogation would seek to depart is still lacking.

As regards the Acceding States, all have committed themselves, in the context of accession negotiations, to
including the establishment of
fully transpose and implement the Directive at the latest by accession,
action programmes. The Commission is closely monitoring these preparations.

(1) Case C-2001/396, Commission v. Ireland.
(2) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999.
(3) OJ L 214, 13.8.1999.

(2004/C 65 E/099)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1684/03

by Jens-Peter Bonde (EDD) to the Commission

Subject: Definition of ‘contracts with the Commission’

(20 May 2003)

Further to the Commission’s answer of 11 February to my question, E-2968/02 (1), concerning the
the term ‘contracts with the
recruitment competition,
Commission’.

I should like a more detailed definition of

The answer reads as follows: ‘x candidates were called to the oral test exam. Of these, x had or have had
contracts with the Commission’.

Will the Commission say whether the term ‘young national expert’ falls within the definition of ‘contracts
with the Commission’?

(1) OJ C 192 E, 14.8.2003, p. 88.

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(20 June 2003)

In the Commission’s response of 11 February 2003, the reference to candidates having or having had
‘contracts with the Commission’ meant that those candidates had or have had ‘permanent’, ‘temporary’ or
‘auxiliary’ contracts with the Commission, under the provisions of Article 1 (18) and Article 2 (18) of Title I
(cid:1) General provisions of the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the Communities.

‘Seconded national expert’ contracts are not encoded in the Commission’s database, nor is this information
requested from those taking part in competitions.