WRITTEN QUESTION E-2171/03 by Johanna Boogerd-Quaak (ELDR) to the Council. Support for rural development.
Date: 2003-06-30
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EAGGF, EU financing arrangements, rural development, town-country relationship

C 65 E/114

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

13.3.2004

In view of the discretion enjoyed by the Spanish authorities under the Schengen acquis in deciding on the
visa applications in question, the Commission considers that the matter does not require it to undertake
any further investigations or measures.

(1) All the Member States, except Ireland and the United Kingdom, as well as Iceland and Norway.
(2) OJ L 239, 22.9.2000.
(3) Council Regulation (EC) No 539/2001 of 15 March 2001 listing the third countries whose nationals must be in
possession of a visa when crossing the external borders and those whose nationals are exempt
from that
requirement, OJ L 81, 21.3.2001. Iraq appears in Annex I to the Regulation, which contains the list of third
countries whose nationals must be in possession of a visa.

(2004/C 65 E/127)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2171/03

by Johanna Boogerd-Quaak (ELDR) to the Council

(30 June 2003)

Subject: Support for rural development

With reference to the resolution adopted by the European Parliament on 5 June 2003 on the proposal for
a Council regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 on support for rural development from the
European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) and repealing Regulation (EC) No 2826/
2000, and bearing in mind the opinion of the European Parliament set out in paragraph 1 thereof, can the
Council answer the following questions:

1.

2.

Is it planning to introduce new objective criteria for rural areas?

If so, does it agree with me that, to date, little attention has been paid to a category of rural areas in
the vicinity of conurbations as a specific category?

3. Does it acknowledge the very specific problems which have to be solved in order to strike a balance
between the requirements of the urban population and the changes to the countryside required for
that purpose, such as more land for leisure activities, short-stay tourism and nature development?

4. Does it agree with me that, when new criteria are being drawn up, a specific type of rural area needs

to be developed in the vicinity of major conurbations?

Reply

(17 November 2003)

1.
No objective criterion for the definition of rural areas has been established in the draft Regulation on
rural development on which the Council has just given its political agrement as part of the reform of the
CAP. The diversity of features of rural areas in the EU and the lack of homogeneity make it difficult to
establish objective criteria for rural areas in the EU. That is why no definition of rural areas has been
established to date at European level.

The reform introduces new measures intended directly for farmers in charge of holdings and for producer
organisations. These measures are conditional upon the maintenance of certain obligations regarding crops
and breeding, and include measures to encourage afforestation and finally the financing of counselling on
the quality of products and production processes.

2.
Classifying rural areas in the vicinity of conurbations as a specific category has certainly been raised
during recent Council dicussions but no decision has thus far been taken. It is therefore up to the Memer
States (cid:1) by means of national rural development programmes (cid:1) to define rural areas as regards their own
territory.

13.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65 E/115

As the Honourable Member undoubtedly knows, European agriculture is based on a multi-functional
3.
model aimed in particular at the development of the primary sector with due respect for sustainable
development, animal welfare and the integrated development of the rural environment in its entirety. In
this connection, actions such as leisure activities, tourism and the creation of natural areas as referred to by
the Honourable Member are planned under this model.

Finally, it should be noted that a conference on rural development in the run-up to a 25-member EU will
be held in Salszburg (Austria) on 13/14 November 2003 and will undoubtedly provide fuel for the debate.

(2004/C 65 E/128)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2208/03

by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(2 July 2003)

Subject: Labelling of ‘free-range’ produce

Can the Commission indicate what minimum conditions must apply before eggs can be labelled ‘free
range’?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(1 August 2003)

Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1274/91 of 15 May 1991 introducing detailed rules for implementing
Council Regulation (EEC) No 1907/90 on certain marketing standards for eggs (1) lays down the criteria to
be respected in the case of eggs to be labelled as ‘free range’.

The Annex III of Regulation (EC) No 1274/91 reads like this:

Minimum requirements to be met by poultry establishments for the various egg farming methods:

(a)

‘Free range eggs’ must be produced in poultry establishments which satisfy at least the conditions
specified in Article 4 of Directive 1999/74/EC with effect from the dates referred to in that Article
and in which:

(cid:1) hens have continuous daytime access to open-air runs, except in the case of temporary

restrictions imposed by veterinary authorities;

(cid:1) the open-air runs to which hens have access is mainly covered with vegetation and not used
for other purposes except for orchards, woodland and livestock grazing if the latter is
authorised by the competent authorities;

(cid:1) the open-air runs must at least satisfy the conditions specified in Article 4(1)(3)b)(ii) of
Council Directive 1999/74/EC whereby the maximum stocking density is not greater than
2500 hens per hectare of ground available to the hens or one hen per 4 m2 at all times;
however, where at least 10 m2 per hen are available and where rotation is practiced and hens
are given even access to the whole area over the flock’s life, each paddock used must at any
time assure at least 2,5 m2 per hen;

(cid:1) the open-air runs are not extending beyond a radius of 150 m from the nearest pophole of
the building; however an extension of up to 350 m from the nearest pophole of the building
is permissible provided that a sufficient number of shelters and drinking troughs within the
meaning of that provision are evenly distributed throughout the whole open-air run with at
least four shelter per hectare.

(1) OJ L 121, 16.5.1991.