WRITTEN QUESTION P-2697/03 by Francesco Fiori (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Anomalies in the customs treatment of, and health requirements applied to, imported chicken and turkey.
Date: 2003-09-02
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Brazil, Thailand, animal nutrition, application of EU law, cereal substitute, consumer protection, customs regulations, frozen product, health control, import (EU), international competition, poultrymeat, restriction on competition, salted product, surveillance concerning imports

C 88 E/628

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

8.4.2004

Directive 1996/96/EC (3) on roadworthiness tests introduces a number of minimum rules, including a first
compulsory roadworthiness test once the vehicle is four years old and at least every two years thereafter.
Member States have the option, however, of laying down stricter standards than these minimum rules.
Greece and Germany apply the Directive’s minimum requirement of a test every two years. Checks on the
validity of certificates and penalties for offenders are covered by the subsidiarity principle.

(1) Council Directive 83/183/EEC of 28 March 1983 on tax exemptions applicable to permanent imports from a

Member State of the personal property of individuals, as amended and now valid, OJ L 105, 23.4.1983.

(2) Council Directive 83/182/EEC of 28 March 1983 on tax exemptions within the Community for certain means of
transport temporarily imported into one Member State from another, as amended and now valid, OJ L 105,
23.4.1983.

(3) Council Directive 96/96/EC of 20 December 1996 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating

to roadworthiness tests for motor vehicles and their trailers, OJ L 46, 17.2.1997.

(2004/C 88 E/0646)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2697/03

by Francesco Fiori (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(2 September 2003)

Subject: Anomalies in the customs treatment of, and health requirements applied to, imported chicken and

turkey

The Commission has been informed on several occasions of anomalies in the customs and health
requirements for imported chicken and turkey,
lightly salted or processed meat avoids the
imposition of Community tariff 0207, which is supposed to be applied to all frozen poultry meat.

in that

This continuing ambiguous situation is causing substantial damage to Italian (and European) producers,
who are being adversely affected by unfair trading practices, and considerable risks for consumers, who are
not adequately protected against livestock rearing and health practices which fall short of European
standards.

This being so,

1. Would the Commission publish the results of the sanitary inspections carried out on consignments of
poultry meat imported from Thailand and Brazil for the purpose of checking that it did not contain
nitrofuran and that no animal flours that failed to meet Community standards had been used in those
countries in the production of livestock for export to Europe?

2. Would the Commission inform Parliament of any measures taken to prevent possible abuses in
connection with livestock production in those countries, or unfair trading practices by importers
taking advantage of the anomalous tariffs imposed by certain European customs authorities?

3. What urgent measures does the Commission intend to take to ensure the correct and uniform
application throughout the Union of the correct consolidated tariff applicable to all frozen meat
imported into Europe, which is already applied in Germany?

Any delay in the application of such measures would cause further unjustifiable damage to European
producers, some of whom have already suffered irreparable damage.

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(16 October 2003)

1.
As regards publication of the results of the sanitary inspections carried out on importation, it should
be noted that import controls fall entirely within the competence of the Member States. In general terms,
Member States are not required to take samples of every import consignment for laboratory analyses, nor
are they required to publish the results or inform the Commission of them. Only when a risk is identified
during these controls are Member States obliged to inform the other Member States and the Commission
via the Union’s rapid alert system (RASFF). The Commission then informs the country of origin. In the
case of nitrofuran contamination of poultry meat imported from Thailand and Brazil, specific Commission
Decisions applied, under which Member States were required to check each consignment of poultry meat
imported from these countries for the presence of nitrofurans and to notify the Commission of the results

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88 E/629

via the RASFF. The Decision remains fully in force in relation to Brazil while the level of testing in relation
to imports from Thailand is now 20 %. These Commission Decisions are safeguard measures and therefore,
by definition, temporary. A summary of RASFF notifications is published each week on the web-site of the
Directorate General (DG) for Health and Consumer Protection.

The reference in the question to checking the possible use of meat and bone meal in animal production in
third countries is not appropriate in this context. Community legislation concerning the import of poultry
products does not impose a feed ban on third countries comparable with the feed ban that is in place in
the EU. The existence of an effective feed ban in a third country is an important element in the
geographical BSE risk (GBR) assessment, which in turn can have an impact on the import conditions for
animal products from ruminants from that third country. Community legislation does not forbid the use of
meat and bone meal
for poultry in third countries wishing to export poultry meat to the
Community. There is no scientific evidence to demonstrate a link between the feeding of MBM to poultry
and the risk of BSE transmission to humans. In any case, the Brazilian authorities have assured the
Commission that MBM is not used in Brazilian poultry production, as it is not cost competitive with
vegetable proteins such as soya.

(MBM)

2. and 3.
The Commission is aware that the customs authorities in some Member States have classified
large quantities of chicken meat imported into the Community as salted meat under tariff heading 0210
when the meat in question was in fact frozen chicken meat with salt added in quantities too small to
preserve it. This meat properly belongs under heading 0207 (frozen poultry meat) since it can be kept for
a long time only because it is frozen.

The very different rates of customs duty attached to these two these headings, and the fact that, in some
third countries, production costs are much lower than in Europe, mean that the practice has indeed had a
serious effect on European poultry producers.

The Commission responded to the differing interpretations given to the classification rules by adopting
appropriate legislative measures in July 2002, i.e. Regulation (EC) No 1223/2002 (1) requiring that the
meat be classified as frozen poultry meat under heading 0207 and Commission Decision 2003/97/EC of
31 January 2003 (2) calling on the German customs administration to withdraw a number of binding tariff
information notices classifying the products in question as salted meat under heading 0210.

the relevant Commission departments are
The Commission assures the Honourable Member
the
constantly monitoring this matter and that, by adopting new regulations or amending notes,
Commission would take whatever action was necessary if it became apparent that the measures already
adopted were not effective in ensuring that tariff classifications were correctly and uniformly applied.

that

(1) Commission Regulation (EC) No 1223/2002 of 8 July 2002 concerning the classification of certain goods in the

Combined Nomenclature, OJ L 179, 9.7.2002.

(2) OJ L 36, 12.2.2003.

(2004/C 88 E/0647)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2910/03

by Joan Vallvé (ELDR) to the Commission

(2 October 2003)

Subject: Difficulties at the German-Polish border

On Friday, 19 September the Association of European Border Regions (AEBR) travelled to the Spree Forest
town of Burg, Germany, for the rotating meeting of the Executive Committee, where I was informed of the
following problem.

For reasons of cost, and in anticipation of Poland’s entry into the EU, the customs administration
announced the termination of the lease for the pre-border waiting area on the site of the former Preschen
air base (Spree-Neisse administrative district) on the A15 at the border crossing point Forst-Olszyna with