WRITTEN QUESTION P-2696/03 by Heinz Kindermann (PSE) to the Commission. Export refunds for ovalbumin.
Date: 2003-09-02
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: World Trade Organisation, animal protein, egg, export policy, export refund, tariff policy

20.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 70 E/129

The Commission, therefore, cannot comment on this expenditure and on the related workshop equipment
(questions a and b).

The only action for the development of workshops in Greek technical education is contained within the
operational programme ‘Education and initial vocational training’. Action 5.2.5 ‘Development of Technical
Vocational Education (TEE) and School Laboratory Centres (ΣΕΚ)’, of the operational programme addresses
needs in this sector with a total budget of EUR 78 000 000.

Actions will be financed within the framework of national specifications for workshop equipment.
The implementation of these actions (training of trainers etc.) has not yet begun since a final beneficiary
for the action 5.2.5 has not yet been selected. In this regard, a call for expressions of interest launched on
25 August 2003 by the Managing Authority is still pending. The delay for the submission of proposals
ended on 15 October 2003 and it is to be expected that the bid to be retained will be announced in the
near future.

(2004/C 70 E/131)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2696/03

by Heinz Kindermann (PSE) to the Commission

(2 September 2003)

Subject: Export refunds for ovalbumin

The production of egg products generates greater quantities of albumin than the European market can
absorb, while third countries have a substantial need for high-grade albumin. In order to be capable of
competing on the world market, the European egg production industry is dependent on export refunds.

Ovalbumin is regarded as a non-Annex I product (CN Code 3502) and so, for the purpose of export
refunds, is bracketed with wheat and milk products rather than eggs in shell (CN Code 0408). On account
of increased exports in the wheat and milk products sectors, the Commission recently introduced a
reduction of over 90 % for export licence applications, a reduction which also applies to ovalbumin,
although exports in that sector have not increased.

Ovalbumin accounts for a very small proportion of the total products covered by CN Code 3502, but is
very important for small and medium-sized undertakings in the egg production industry.

1. What is the Commission’s assessment of the effects on the ovalbumin sector of the measures
decided?

Is the Commission prepared to change the tariff classification of ovalbumin by reclassifying it under
2.
agricultural products, thus placing it on the same footing as other egg products such as eggs in shell, egg
yolk and whole egg (CN Code 0408)? If so, what timescale does it have in mind? If not, why not?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(26 September 2003)

Egg albumin falling under CN subheading 3502 is indeed not included in Annex I of the EC Treaty.
Together with other Non Annex I products containing cereals, sugar, milk and eggs it is however eligible
to benefit of export refunds for the amount of agricultural products of the four sectors mentioned which
are used for their manufacture.

In the Uruguay Round the Union agreed to limit its export refunds for agricultural products. These
commitments were made separately for the various agricultural product sectors and for Non Annex I
products.

C 70 E/130

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

20.3.2004

The recent strong rise of applications for refund licences of Non Annex I products during 2002/2003 has
indeed led to ever increasing reduction coefficients (42 % first tranche, 95 % last tranche) in order to
respect the Union’s World Trade Organisation (WTO) commitments. These reductions were particularly
felt by the egg product industry in view of the quite unique position of egg albumin amongst the many
Non Annex I products being manufactured from one raw material alone. According to trade statistics
available until June 2003, no dramatic drop of export can yet be observed.

(2004/C 70 E/132)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2709/03

by Maurizio Turco (NI) to the Commission

(11 September 2003)

Subject: OLAF investigation into Eurostat

On 8 July 2002, OLAF issued a press release entitled ‘OLAF investigation into Eurostat’ (OLAF/06/02) in
which it stated that it had on that date forwarded to the State Prosecutor of the Grand Duchy of
Luxembourg information it had gathered during two enquiries into matters liable to result in criminal
proceedings concerning possible fraud relating to contracts concluded between Eurostat (cid:1) the Statistical
Office of the European Communities (cid:1) and private companies. OLAF had conducted the two enquiries as
part of a series of investigations into Eurostat.

Could the Commission clearly state whether:

(cid:1) it has any news concerning the activities of the State Prosecutor of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg
in respect of the information gathered by OLAF and forwarded on 8 July 2002, which is to say what,
if any, measures have been taken in respect of officials and/or companies;

(cid:1) the investigation involved persons and/or companies who were also involved in the investigation
referred to in letter No 003411 of 18 March 2003 from the Director-General of OLAF to the Paris
Public Prosecutor (Reference CMS No 10120021510);

(cid:1) the ‘series of investigations’ in progress on 8 July 2002 included the enquiry that led OLAF to forward
information to the French authorities on 18 March 2003, or in other words, is OLAF still conducting
investigations into Eurostat?

Answer given by Ms Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(22 October 2003)

The Commission was informed by the European Anti-fraud Office (OLAF) that following the transmission
to the Luxembourg judicial authorities on 8 July 2002 of information relating to two enquiries, two
investigations were started into two private Luxembourg companies in connection with Eurostat. One judge
judicial
is currently carrying out
proceedings.

the two investigations, which are covered by confidentiality of

The file relating to a French company based in Paris sent to the Paris Public Prosecutor on 19 March 2003
is completely separate from the two files sent to Luxembourg.

The file sent to the Paris Public Prosecutor was part of the ‘series of investigations’ into Eurostat which
were in progress on 8 July 2002. OLAF is currently carrying out other enquiries into Eurostat.