WRITTEN QUESTION E-2447/03 by Marie-Arlette Carlotti (PSE) to the Commission. Detailed rules for the implementation of technical and financial assistance measures for traditional ACP suppliers of bananas.
Date: 2003-07-23
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: ACP countries, cif price, competitiveness, financial aid, statistics, technical cooperation, tropical fruit

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/739

(2004/C 78 E/0788)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2447/03

by Marie-Arlette Carlotti (PSE) to the Commission

(23 July 2003)

Subject: Detailed rules for the implementation of technical and financial assistance measures for traditional

ACP suppliers of bananas

The per country annual funding of technical and financial assistance measures for traditional ACP suppliers
of bananas is determined by the Commission using a calculation method that takes into account the
competitivity gap observed between the beneficiary ACP countries and third-country banana suppliers and
the importance of banana production for the economy of the country concerned (Commission Regulation
(EC) No 1609/1999 (1)).

The Commission bases its calculation of the competitivity gap on the average reference price per tonne of
bananas produced in each beneficiary ACP country. This is a CIF (cost, insurance and freight) price. It
seems that the CIF price for ACP bananas is reconstructed on the basis of the statistical customs value of
the bananas as recorded by Eurostat. However, the absence of any Community harmonisation of the
customs registration of ACP bananas results in widely-acknowledged differences in the price from one
Member State to another. The same statistical data were also used by the Commission in application of the
first directive on a system of assistance to suppliers (Regulation (EC) No 2686/94 (2)), but in the opposing
sense.

These detailed implementing rules for the policy desired by the Council and the European Parliament result
in distortions between beneficiaries.

In the interests of transparency, could the Commission divulge the variables and calculations that formed
the basis for the allocation of funding in 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003?

Could it divulge all the data used to calculate the average CIF reference price for bananas in each ACP
country in 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003, as well as the average CIF reference prices for each ACP
country for those years?

Does the Commission plan to rectify the method used for its calculation, so that this is performed on fair
and transparent bases for the years to come?

(1) OJ L 190, 23.7.1999, p. 14.
(2) OJ L 286, 5.11.1994, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(5 September 2003)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1609/1999 of 22 July 1999 lays down detailed rules
the
implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 856/1999 establishing the special framework of assistance
(SFA) to traditional African, Caribbean and pacific (ACP) suppliers of bananas, including the methodology
to be applied for calculating the yearly individual amounts.
the
implementing regulation, the prices used in the calculations are the cost,
insurance and freight (c.i.f.)
the data used are official statistics, which are available by
values as published by Eurostat. Hence,
consulting the database Comext (1).

In accordance with Article 3 of

for

The alleged lack of harmonisation among Member States in the collection of data is being looked into,
further to a letter of the Ivory Coast producers’ organisation and a meeting held between its representatives
and the Commission.

As to the different criteria applied when comparing the current SFA and the banana scheme established in
1994, important changes in the banana Union trade regime have occurred, forced upon the Community
by world trade organisation (WTO) rules, which European development policy has to take into account.

C 78 E/740

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

The Commission does not see any distortions having occurred among beneficiaries. The fact that the
weakest ACP competitors have so far received higher support is in line with the SFA policy choice, namely
to help more the less competitive ACP suppliers. As of 2004, in accordance with the provisions in force, a
reduction coefficient will have to be applied to all beneficiaries, but the reduction will be lower for those
ACPs having improved their competitiveness, and will be proportional to those improvements.

None of the beneficiaries has ever disputed the correctness of the calculations leading to the individual
yearly amounts. Even the representatives of the Ivorian producers stated at the above mentioned meeting
that
in their view the Commission has always applied the method prescribed by the Commission
Regulation in a correct and fair manner.

(1) The Comext database, accessible to Parliament, contains this data.

(2004/C 78 E/0789)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2452/03

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Council

(23 July 2003)

Subject: Growing American pressure on future EU Member States to permanently cease their cooperation

with the International Criminal Court

1.
Has the Council heard that, under US legislation, as from 1 July 2003 no financial assistance will be
provided to the approximately 50 States which have ratified the Statute of the International Criminal Court
in The Hague?

2.
Is the Council aware that the future EU Member States Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovakia, Slovenia
and Bulgaria are among the 35 States which have previously received US assistance but in future will only
be able to receive it if they conclude an ‘Article 98 agreement’ promising never to extradite American
citizens to the International Criminal Court in The Hague?

3.
Does the Council regard this new step as an escalation of the United States’ approach, which already
featured the American Service Members Protection Act (dubbed by some the ‘Hague Invasion Act’) and the
agreement signed with the future EU Member State Romania on 1 August 2002 on the exclusion of
Americans?

4.
Does the Council accept that, as a result of this escalation, the Criminal Court will not be able to
operate properly and that those responsible for future war crimes comparable to those committed in the
former Yugoslavia and Rwanda will enjoy permanent immunity from prosecution in cases where no
adequate national prosecution procedure is applied?

5. What will the Council do to prevent further pressure being brought to bear on EU Member States
and future Member States to permanently cease their cooperation with the International Criminal Court,
contrary to the common position adopted by the Council in 2001 and 2002?

Source: De Volkskrant, 2 July 2003.

Reply

(4 March 2004)

The Council recalls the importance the EU attaches to the preservation of the integrity of the Rome

1.
Statute.

The Council confirms it has received information, both from NGOs and from the third countries
concerned, on renewed heavy US pressure to conclude non-surrender agreements. This pressure consists
mainly in threats to withdraw US military assistance as provided for by the American Service members
Protection Act, the so-called ASPA (effective from 1 July 2003). It was mentioned that such pressure might
also include the decision to withdraw the whole US aid to certain countries. The US authorities have,
however, strongly denied this latter information.