WRITTEN QUESTION E-3134/03 by José Ribeiro e Castro (UEN) to the Commission. Holland — Ecstasy.
Date: 2003-10-23
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction, Europol, Netherlands, area of freedom, security and justice, drug traffic, illicit trade, narcotic

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/227

The Commission:

(cid:1) can it confirm receipt of the letters referred to;

(cid:1) what information does it have as to the consequences foreseen by OASIS and the environmental
organisations for the area in question, and specifically the foreseeable destruction of habitats, including
the seamounts, the decline of stocks of deepwater fish and the destruction of small-scale local fisheries,
affecting the lives of the fishermen and their families;

(cid:1) does it agree that the marine ecosystems of the three archipelagos are extremely vulnerable, and

require protection?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(25 November 2003)

In July 2003 the Commission received a joint letter from Greenpeace, Seas at Risk and World Wide Fund
for Nature (WWF) expressing their concern about the proposed modification of Council Regulation (EEC)
No 2847/93 of 12 October 1993 establishing a control system applicable to the common fisheries
policy (1) (Western Waters) to reduce the 200 nautical mile (nm) exclusion zone around the Azores,
Madeira and the Canary Islands.

According to recent scientific reports and, in particular, the reports of the International Council for the
Exploration of the Sea (ICES), trawling-induced damage to deep-water coral reefs has been proved in
several areas. The impact of trawled gear kills the polyps and breaks up the reef structure. Recovery may
not be possible or could be seriously impaired. Damage may range from a decrease in the reef size and a
consequent decrease in abundance and diversity of associated fauna to a complete disintegration of the reef
and its replacement with a low-diversity community.

As for deep-sea fish, ICES has warned that several deep-sea stocks are now heavily exploited and in some
cases severely depleted. The Commission knows that these species are particularly vulnerable to overfishing
because of their slow ability to reproduce.

Members of Parliament as well as Portuguese local and national authorities have contacted the Commission
to express their concerns about the future of local fishing communities. The damage to these habitats are a
threat to their survival.

The Commission confirms the extreme vulnerability of seamount ecosystems in the Azores, Madeira and
the Canary Islands and the need to provide the necessary protection to these important marine habitats. To
this end, the Commission is preparing a draft proposal for a Council Regulation to prohibit the use of
bottom trawls in certain areas of the Atlantic Ocean, including the three areas the Honourable Member
refers to.

(1) OJ L 261, 20.10.1993.

(2004/C 78 E/0231)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3134/03

by José Ribeiro e Castro (UEN) to the Commission

(23 October 2003)

Subject: Holland (cid:1) ‘Ecstasy’

In its answer to Written Question E-2309/03 (1) the Commission confirmed that ‘the Emcdda in its annual
report also indicates that the Netherlands is a major site for the production of ecstasy, amphetamines and
related drugs’ but adds that ‘evidence of production in other Member States and in east European countries
is also reported’, without specifiying the level of production.

C 78 E/228

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

On the other hand, some of the questions posed remain unanswered, such as ‘whether it can confirm that
most of the drugs come from the Netherlands’ and if so, ‘what measures it has taken or intends to take to
prevent drugs being exported from the Netherlands and distributed throughout the EU?’.

The above-mentioned answer also says ‘the Commission has emphasised that the issue of synthetic drugs
must remain a top priority for the Union and its Member States. This has also been emphasised by the
Justice and Home Affairs Ministers of the EU. Following on from a meeting of Justice and Home Affairs
Ministers in September 2002 an implementation plan on actions to be taken in regard to the supply of
synthetic drugs has been adopted by the Council.’

Can the Commission therefore say:

(cid:1) whether it can confirm that among the Member States the Netherlands is the most important location
for the manufacture of ‘Ecstasy’ and also the major source of supply of the drug for the other Member
Stastes, in particular Portugal;

(cid:1) for how many years it has been aware of this situation;

(cid:1) since it has stated that there is ‘evidence of production in other Member States’, to which countries it

is refering and with what degree of intensity and/or risk compared with the Netherlands;

(cid:1) what measures it has taken or plans to take to prevent drugs from being exported from the
Netherlands and distributed throughout the EU; as regards the other EU ‘producer’ countries, whether
the levels of risk and ‘marketing’ are similar;

(cid:1) what it thinks of the implementation plan for the actions to be taken as regards the supply of
synthetic drugs, adopted at the meeting of EU Justice and Home Affairs Ministers held in September
2002; whether it considers the measures which the plan proposes for tackling the supply of synthetic
drugs adequate and appropriate?

(1) OJ C 70 E, 20.3.2004, p. 83.

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(5 December 2003)

Each year the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) and the European
Police Office (Europol) produce, on the basis of information and statistical data provided by the national
authorities of the Member States, a report on the state of the drugs problem in the European Union and
the candidate countries as regards drugs production, trafficking and consumption. In response to a number
of concerns expressed by the Member States, the 2001 report identified the European Union as the main
source of ecstasy.

EMCDDA’s 2003 annual report on the state of the drugs problem in the European Union and Norway
stated that the number of production sites for synthetic drugs discovered each year in the EU is constant at
around 50 to 70. The Netherlands and Belgium are the main production sites for ecstasy, amphetamines
and related drugs, but production is also reported in other Member States including Spain, France and the
United Kingdom and in candidate countries (Estonia, Lithuania, Poland and the Czech Republic).

This state of affairs is confirmed by the 2003 annual report on the state of the drugs problem in the
acceding and candidate countries in the European Union, which states that synthetic drugs such as
amphetamines and ecstasy are produced in illegal laboratories in the Baltic States, Bulgaria, the Czech
Republic and Hungary for domestic consumption.

As regards the measures taken to prevent drugs being exported from the Netherlands and distributed
throughout the EU, no Member State can, on the face of it, be regarded as ‘clean’ when it comes to drugs
production and trafficking. All the Member States have signed the United Nations conventions and are
active participants in the early-warning system set up as part of the Joint Action of June 1997. As the
European Union’s main instrument in the war against drug trafficking, Europol shares its expertise on a
regular basis with Member States to help them combat criminal gangs and shut down illegal laboratories
involved in producing synthetic drugs.

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/229

Under the 2000-04 Action Plan the Commission, together with the Member States and Europol, undertook
to put in place tougher measures to combat drug trafficking. It will also help the Member States to step up
police, customs and judicial cooperation and to develop expertise in controlling the trade in chemical
precursors.

In addition, the Commission hopes that the Council will shortly reach a political agreement on the
framework decision laying down minimum provisions on criminal acts and penalties in the field of drug
trafficking.

The implementation plan outlining action to be taken in relation to synthetic drugs calls on Member States,
Europol and EMCDDA to take specific measures to combat diversion of precursors, illegal laboratories and
distribution networks. It will be examined as part of the final assessment of the 2000-04 Action Plan.

With a view to tightening legislation on synthetic drugs, the Commission has presented a proposal for a
Council Decision on the information exchange, risk-assessment and the control on new narcotic drugs and
new synthetic drugs which will replace the Joint Action of June 1997. Parliament will also have the
opportunity to express its opinion on this subject.

(2004/C 78 E/0232)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3151/03

by Herman Schmid (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(23 October 2003)

Subject: The perception of quality of life in the EU

There are many ways of measuring quality of life. The OECD’s league table measures the GNP of the
private products and services market. By this yardstick Sweden lies in 17th place.

Another measurement method, devised by the US Department of Labour, looks at the development of
industrial productivity (International comparisons of manufacturing productivity and unit labour cost
trends 2002, Newsletter 9 September 2003 (cid:1) Bureau of Labour Statistics, Washington DC). Here the
figures show that the increase in productivity development in 2002 was higher in Sweden than in any
other country. Accordingly Sweden took 1st place in this table.

It is clear that different measurement systems yield different results. Therefore it is interesting to ask the
Commission whether it considers that any of these systems can give a reliable, usable and fair picture of
the quality of life in a Member State. Do they not in fact present too narrow a view of quality of life in the
EU, whose identity claims to be built on the European welfare model, a balance between competition and
social responsibility?

There are also other scales which raise their sights above the measurement of mere economic and
statistical figures. These arose because the bodies which commissioned them, including the UN, considered
that quality of life must include citizens’ perception of their situation. Increased standards of living for the
few or for the many need not automatically lead to better quality of life. Citizens must first give their
assessment of how a better economy has improved their quality of life as a nation or as individuals. And
for this, more advanced measuring criteria are needed.

Measurement methods have been developed which include length of life, a good environment and legal
certainty. One international index based on 40 quality of life indicators is called WISP, the Weighted Index
of Social Progress. This scale includes variables such as education, health, equality, social economy,
rights, corruption, victims of war) etc. On this
demography, environment, social chaos (political
measurement Sweden again comes in first place.

Does the Commission consider that WISP and similar measuring schemes should be used more often in
the EU when comparing EU Member States with each other? Might the balance between competition and
the social dimension, to which the EU undertook to aspire under the Lisbon strategy, risk being distorted