WRITTEN QUESTION E-3183/03 by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission. Calculating the additional levy in the Azores Autonomous Region.
Date: 2003-10-27
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Azores, agricultural levy, agricultural quota, agricultural surplus, milk, milk product, regulation of agricultural production

C 78 E/482

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

(2004/C 78 E/0504)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3183/03

by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission

(27 October 2003)

Subject: Calculating the additional levy in the Azores Autonomous Region

The Commission is certainly not unaware that
laid down by Regulation (EEC)
No 3950/92 (1) for calculating the additional levy in the milk and milk products sector are complex, and
give the Member States considerable latitude in establishing the criteria and methods of calculation.

the conditions

In the case of the Azores Autonomous Region, the existence of additional mechanisms and conditions laid
down under the arrangements established by the Poseima Regulation make their application still more
complex.

There is a certain amount of confusion and perplexity in the Azores Autonomous Region, about the
results announced by buyers to milk producers, given that the first estimates indicated that the additional
levy was non-existent, while the later figures, forwarded to the Commission, indicated that the levy did
exist.

I have been asked, as a Member of the European Parliament, to clarify the questions which the affected
I have likewise sought explanations from the Commission services
farmers are asking themselves.
responsible for managing the additional levy on milk systems, who have refused so far to provide me with
any explanation, arguing that they are obliged to do so only to the Member State itself.

I would therefore like to know whether the Commission can confirm that this is indeed how it views its
responsibility to inform (or not) European citizens, and, in particular, their elected representatives.

If this is not the case, will the Commission please tell me when and how I can obtain the clarifications I
have requested.

(1) OJ L 405, 31.12.1992, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(17 December 2003)

In answer to the questions of the Honourable Member, the Commission stresses that all Member States are
subject to the same rules when it comes to assessing whether their producers have complied with the rules
in milk quotas). To establish a possible overrun, the actual quantity of milk produced, under either the
national reference quantity for delivery to the processing industry or the national reference quantity for
direct sales to consumers, is compared with the respective national reference quantities. In the case of
delivery, this quantity is corrected upwards where the fat content of the milk produced exceeds the
reference fat content.

In the context of distributing the levy among producers who contributed to the excess, Member States
have the option to reduce individual excess of producers by reallocating unused quantities from other
producers. If they decide to do so, there are strict rules for such reallocations.

On top of the normal rules, as described above, the Azores have been granted a temporary exemption
from the levy within the limit of a maximum of 73 000 tonnes/year. In a case where producers exceed
their reference quantity, this exemption can be used to diminish their overrun (see Article 23 of Regulation
(EC) No 1453/2001 (1)).

The Council decided in September 2003 to grant a permanent quota increase of 50 000 tonnes/year for
the Azores (see footnote to point b) of Annex I of Regulation (EC) No 1788/2003 (2)) and to decrease the
temporary exemption (see Article 147(3)(d) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 (3)). The Commission
recently made a proposal to grant, in addition to the increase of quota of 50 000 tonnes/year, a permanent
exemption for 23 000 tonnes/year to producers having overrun their reference quantity (4).

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/483

Portugal, like all other Member States, has communicated the provisional 2002-2003 production figures to
the Commission. It appears that it exceeds its national reference quantity for delivery. On the basis of the
data received, the Commission is presently seeking additional explanations from the Portuguese authorities.

After having received and evaluated this information,
Member.

the Commission will

inform the Honourable

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 1453/2001 of 28 June 2001 introducing specific measures for certain agricultural
products for the Azores and Madeira and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 1600/92 (Poseima), OJ L 198, 21.7.2001.
(2) Council Regulation (EC) No 1788/2003 of 29 September 2003 establishing a levy in the milk and milk products

sector, OJ L 270, 21.10.2003.

(3) Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 of 29 September 2003 establishing common rules for direct support
schemes under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers and amending
Regulations (EEC) No 2019/93, (EC) No 1452/2001, (EC) No 1453/2001, (EC) No 1454/2001, (EC) 1868/94,
(EC) No 1251/1999,
(EEC) No 2358/71 and (EC) No 2529/2001,
OJ L 270, 21.10.2003.
(4) COM(2003) 617 final.

(EC) No 1673/2000,

(EC) No 1254/1999,

(2004/C 78 E/0505)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3186/03

by Geoffrey Van Orden (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Cross-border consumer goods transactions

(27 October 2003)

What safeguards are in place for consumers who buy goods in a different EU country to their home
country which then prove to be faulty and require replacement or refunding?

Are procedures in place for the speedy resolution of cross-border disputes over transactions of this kind?

If such procedures are in place, how can EU citizens access information about them?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(25 November 2003)

Consumer Protection legislation has been adopted at European level in order to provide consumers with
the same degree of protection whether they purchase goods and services at home or in another Member
State. By doing so, the Commission aims to build confidence and encourage consumers to take full
advantage of the internal market.

The two main Directives to achieve this end are Directive 1999/44/EC of the Parliament and of the
Council of 25 May 1999, on certain aspects of the sale of consumer goods and associated guarantees (1)
and Directive 97/7/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 1997, on the protection of
consumers in respect of distance contracts (2).

Directive 1999/44/EC provides consumers with protection in the event that they have purchased defective
goods or goods that are not in conformity with the terms of the contract. In these instances, consumers
can request the repair of the goods, the delivery of new goods, a price reduction or a complete refund of
their money if the lack of conformity becomes apparent within two years of taking delivery of the goods.
The Directive also requires that commercial guarantees such as manufacturers’ guarantees or retailers’
guarantees be transparent and clearly drafted (3).

Directive 97/7/EC was introduced to provide a minimum level of consumer protection in respect of
distance contracts. These are contracts between consumers and suppliers where there has been no face-to-
face contact between the parties prior to entering into the contract. Contracts concluded by telephone,
mail, fax, television, Internet and electronic mail are all examples of distance contracts within the meaning
of the Directive. The Directive imposes certain information requirements on suppliers and gives consumers
the right to withdraw from the distance contract within a cooling-off period of at least seven working
days (4).