WRITTEN QUESTION E-2019/03 by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Anti-dumping duty on bicycles imported from China.
Date: 2003-06-17
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: China, anti-dumping duty, anti-dumping legislation, cycle and motorcycle industry, impact study, two-wheeled vehicle

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88 E/57

This action plan aims at increasing the impact of existing interventions, increasing the affordability of key
pharmaceuticals, and encouraging research in and development of specific global public goods to tackle
HIV/AIDS, malaria and TB at the national, regional and global level. This Programme has received more
than EUR 1 billion.

Two years after its adoption the PfA remains a comprehensive, forward looking and coherent Union policy
framework aimed at making a significant contribution towards improved country, regional and global
action against the three communicable diseases. The Commission will continue to work on a long term
approach within the framework of the Doha Declaration on trade related aspects of intellectual property
rights (TRIPS) and Public Health. The Commission will continue to promote tiered pricing, technology
transfer and local production, to facilitate sustained access to affordable medicines. This approach is
complemented by investment in the development of better preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic products
through increased funding through the 6th Research Framework Programme. Furthermore, the Union has
strongly supported the creation of the Global Health Fund, which targets the financing of specific projects:
the Union contributes up to 55 % of the EUR 4,5 billions which are allocated to this Fund.

Given these elements, the Commission does not see the added value of creating new institutions in this
field.

(2004/C 88 E/0062)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2019/03

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(17 June 2003)

Subject: Anti-dumping duty on bicycles imported from China

Early in 1993, the Commission announced its intention to impose an anti-dumping duty on imports of
bicycles originating in the People’s Republic of China. ‘The rate of the duty, applicable to the net free-at-
Community-frontier price, before duty, shall be 34,4 %.’ (IP/93/182 of 11 March 1993). This measure
remains in force until July 2005.

What favourable or unfavourable impact has this measure had on the European bicycle industry?

Does the Commission intend to extend this anti-dumping duty?

If so, can it provide further details?

If not, why not?

If it is decided not to extend the measure, what consequences is this likely to have for the European bicycle
industry?

How will the Commission deal with these consequences?

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(15 July 2003)

The proceeding was initiated following a request of the European Bicycle Manufacturers Association
imposed definitive measures by Council Regulation (EEC) No 2474/93 of
(EBMA) and the Council
8 September 1993 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports into the Community of bicycles
originating in the People’s Republic of China and collecting definitively the provisional anti-dumping
duty (1). The rate of duty was fixed at 30,6 %. This duty rate was confirmed following an expiry review
which was concluded by Council Regulation (EC) No 1524/2000 of 10 July 2000 imposing a definitive
anti-dumping duty on imports of bicycles originating in the People’s Republic of China (2). Subsequently,

C 88 E/58

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

8.4.2004

four producers claiming market economy status.
an interim review was opened at
This review was terminated by Council Regulation (EC) No 2131/2001 of 29 October 2001 (3) without
changing the level of the measures, because the applicants had withdrawn their review request. The
measures will expire in July 2005 unless a full interim or expiry review confirming the continued need of
the measures is opened before that date.

the request of

In accordance to Article 11(2) of the Anti-dumping Basic Regulation (4), Community producers are entitled
to lodge a request for an expiry review no later than three months before expiration of the duties. Pursuant
to Article 5(5) of the Anti-dumping Basic Regulation, the Commission is not able to comment on requests
or complaints seeking the initiation of an investigation prior to a decision being taken on whether or not
to actually initiate an investigation … Should such an expiry review be initiated, a notice of initiation
would normally be published in the Official Journal of the European Union shortly before the scheduled
expiry of the measure, i.e. in this case, 10 July 2005. The same would happen in case that measures were
allowed to expire, i.e. a notice announcing the actual expiry of the measures would be published in the
Official Journal around the date of the expiry of the measures. Up to date no notice has been published
concerning the above-mentioned measures.

Future developments on this proceeding can be followed at the following address on the Internet: (http://
europa.eu.int/comm/trade/policy/dumping/stats.htm).

With regard to the impact of the measures for the Community Industry, this information is not collected
systematically outside an investigation. Since no investigation is ongoing, the Commission does not have
any information at the moment. However, it should be noted that EBMA has argued in the last review that
the expiry of measures would be likely to result in continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury to
the Community Industry. For any further information concerning the impact of
the
Commission suggests the Honourable Member to contact the EBMA directly.

the measures,

(1) OJ L 228, 9.9.1993.
(2) OJ L 175, 14.7.2000.
(3) OJ L 287, 31.10.2001.
(4) Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries

not members of the European Community, OJ L 56, 6.3.1996.

(2004/C 88 E/0063)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2022/03

by Lennart Sacrédeus (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(17 June 2003)

Subject: Arrest of Nobel Peace Prize laureate Aung San Suu Kyi

Burma’s leading advocate of human rights and democracy, the Nobel Peace Prize laureate Aung San Suu
Kyi, was detained on 30 May 2003 near Monywa in Burma. The country’s military junta says that Aung
San Suu Kyi and 19 other members of her National League for Democracy Party (NLD) have been placed
in ‘protective custody’ following clashes between her supporters and pro-government demonstrators in
northern Burma.

More than 100 students, NLD supporters and Buddhist monks were arrested in the early hours of 31 May
2003; a number of members of parliament were also detained. Seven high-ranking NLD officials were
placed under house arrest and more than 50 local branches of the NLD party were forced to shut down.
The arrests are viewed as the biggest defeat for democracy in Burma for many years.

What real pressure has the Commission and the EU exerted to persuade the junta in Burma immediately to
release the Nobel Peace Prize laureate Aung San Suu Kyi and the other detainees, including the members of
parliament? How can the EU lend force to the demands that the military junta should break the spiral of
violence and pave the way for a speedy transition to democracy?