do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3239/03 by Martin Callanan (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Bird killing in Malta.
Date: 2003-11-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Malta, application of EU law, bird, national implementing measure, protection of animal life

C 78 E/500

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

(2004/C 78 E/0521)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3239/03

by Martin Callanan (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(3 November 2003)

Subject: Bird killing in Malta

Given reports of widespread illegal hunting and trapping of birds in Malta, what action is the Commission
taking to ensure the full implementation and enforcement of the Birds Directive (79/409/EEC (1)) on the
Maltese islands?

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979, p. 1.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(16 December 2003)

As an acceding country, Malta will be required to fully implement and enforce the ‘Birds’ Directive 79/409/
EEC (1) on 1 May 2004 with the exception of the transition period that was granted to allow the trapping
of seven species of finch until 31 December 2008. The Commission continues to monitor and report on
the progress made by Malta in working towards meeting this obligation and the latest state of play was
reported in the Comprehensive Monitoring Report (CMR) issued in November 2003.

The CMR concluded that Malta is partially meeting the commitments and requirements in nature
protection. It also observed that enhanced efforts are required to prepare the lists of proposed nature
protection sites and special bird protection areas, including the completion of the consultation process.
Considerable efforts are also needed to ensure better enforcement of Malta’s commitments regarding the
Birds Directive. Producing an enforcement strategy should be a priority of the national Ornis Committee.

The Commission will continue to monitor the situation in the period before accession.

(1) Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds, OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.

(2004/C 78 E/0522)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3243/03

by Jan Wiersma (PSE) to the Commission

(3 November 2003)

Subject: The ‘Buy American Act’ in the American defence budget

Is the Commission aware that a law has been included in the American defence budget of the House of
Representatives that extensively commits the Pentagon to buying American defence materiel, viz. the
so-called ‘Buy American Act’?

What is the Commission’s position in relation to the ‘Buy American Act’ that has been incorporated into
US Defense Authorization Bill FY 2004?

What efforts has the Commission made in seeking to prevent the act’s adoption?

To what extent does the act amount to a violation of international trade treaties?

What impact will the act’s adoption have on the arms industry in Europe and on cooperation in the area
of arms production between the EU and the USA?

What countermeasures will the Commission take if the act is definitively adopted?
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3251/03 by Baroness Sarah Ludford (ELDR) to the Council. International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY).
Date: 2003-11-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: International Criminal Tribunal, Western Balkans, cooperation policy, fight against crime, international criminal law, migration control

C 84 E/228

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

(2004/C 84 E/0273)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3251/03

by Baroness Sarah Ludford (ELDR) to the Council

(3 November 2003)

Subject: International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY)

The External Relations Council of 13 October, expressing deep concern that certain Western Balkan
countries were still failing to cooperate sufficiently with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former
Yugoslavia (ICTY), reiterated the need to intensify efforts to bring Radovan Karadzic, General Mladic and
General Gotovina to the ICTY.

In its Common Position 2003/280/CFSP (1) of 16 April 2003 the Council imposed an EU travel ban on
some persons obstructing the mandate of the ICTY, and this has had a positive impact, especially in Bosnia
and Herzegovina (BiH).

What steps is the Council taking to broaden the list of persons named in that Common Position to include
those helping ICTY indictees elsewhere in the region to evade justice?

Specifically, will those sheltering Karadzic, Mladic and Gotovina, whose respective support networks in
Croatia and Serbia and Montenegro are reported by ICTY to be significant, now be subject to the travel
ban?

(1) OJ L 101, 23.4.2003, p. 22.

Reply

(9 March 2004)

The Council Common Position 2003/280/CFSP of 16 April has been updated by Council Decision
1.
the High
2003/484/CFSP of 27 June 2003, when,
Representative for Bosnia and Herzegovina, 12 additional names have been added to the list of persons set
out in the Annex to Common Position 2003/280/CFSP.

following recommendations from the Office of

The Common Position is kept under constant review and the Council can adopt modifications to the

2.
list contained in the Annex as required in order to assist the ICTY.

(2004/C 84 E/0274)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3267/03

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Council

(4 November 2003)

Subject: Qualified majority voting

Can the Council state on how many occasions each year for the last five years each Member State has been
outvoted in the Council when a decision on a legislative proposal (directive, regulation, decision) has been
taken by qualified majority voting?

Reply

(9 March 2004)

The Council
concerning the same subject and relating to the years 1995-2000.

invites the Honourable Member to refer to the Council’s reply to question E-3938/00

The Honourable Member’s attention is drawn to the fact that, since January 2001, the General Secretariat
of the Council has published monthly records of the Council’s activities,
including voting results and
explanations, on the Council’s Internet site (http://ue.eu.int).
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1941/2003 of 3 November 2003 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
Date: 2003-11-03
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: citrus fruit, fruit vegetable, grape, import price, pip fruit, stone fruit

4.11.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 286/1

I

(Acts whose publication is obligatory)

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1941/2003

of 3 November 2003

establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and
vegetables

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

(2)

In compliance with the above criteria,
the standard
import values must be fixed at the levels set out in the
Annex to this Regulation,

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 of
21 December 1994 on detailed rules for the application of the
import arrangements
last
amended by Regulation (EC) No 1947/2002 (2), and in parti-
cular Article 4(1) thereof,

fruit and vegetables (1), as

for

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Whereas:

(1)

Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 lays down, pursuant to the
outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade nego-
tiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the
standard values for imports from third countries,
in
respect of the products and periods stipulated in the
Annex thereto.

The standard import values referred to in Article 4 of Regula-
tion (EC) No 3223/94 shall be fixed as indicated in the Annex
hereto.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 4 November 2003.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 3 November 2003.

For the Commission

J. M. SILVA RODRÍGUEZ

Agriculture Director-General

(1) OJ L 337, 24.12.1994, p. 66.
(2) OJ L 299, 1.11.2002, p. 17.

L 286/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

4.11.2003

to the Commission Regulation of 3 November 2003 establishing the standard import values for determining
the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

ANNEX

CN code

0702 00 00

0707 00 05

0709 90 70

0805 50 10

0806 10 10

0808 10 20, 0808 10 50, 0808 10 90

0808 20 50

Third country code (1)

Standard import value

(EUR/100 kg)

052
060
096
204
653
999

052
628
999

052
204
999

052
204
388
524
528
999

052
388
400
508
999

052
060
064
388
400
404
512
720
800
804
999

052
060
064
388
400
512
528
720
999

60,0
57,2
50,7
51,9
52,4
54,4

130,9
139,3
135,1

100,3
73,9
87,1

86,6
84,1
91,0
51,5
81,9
79,0

113,3
94,8
198,6
329,7
184,1

51,0
27,9
48,8
79,2
73,7
84,1
77,5
40,7
190,9
95,3
76,9

117,3
53,5
60,3
68,4
67,2
55,8
52,2
51,0
65,7

(1) Country nomenclature as fixed by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2020/2001 (OJ L 273, 16.10.2001, p. 6). Code ‘999’ stands for

‘of other origin’.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-3298/03 by Ian Hudghton (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Effect of climatic change on cod stocks.
Date: 2003-11-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: climate change, conservation of fish stocks, fisheries policy, sea fish

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/799

type of crop in a region, this responsibility should be born by farmers who introduce the new production
type. As regards liability in the case of economic damage resulting from admixture of GMOs to other
crops the Commission recommends that Member States should examine their civil liability laws to find out
whether the existing national laws offer sufficient and equal possibilities in this regard.

(1) Directive 2001/18/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 12 March 2001 on the deliberate release into the
environment of genetically modified organisms and repealing Council Directive 90/220/EEC, OJ L 106, 17.4.2001.

(2) Council Directive 90/220/EEC of 23 April 1990, OJ L 117, 8.5.1990.
(3) DEFRA press release: http://www.defra.gov.uk/news/2003/031013b.htm
(4) OJ L 189, 29.7.2003.

(2004/C 78 E/0848)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3298/03

by Ian Hudghton (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(3 November 2003)

Subject: Effect of climatic change on cod stocks

There is widespread anecdotal evidence, supported by the fishermen with the real experience of fishing
northern waters, that stocks of cod are moving north as sea temperatures increase. This is supported by
scientific research including, notably, that which was published in Science Magazine vol. 296 No 5573
relating to work done by the Sir Alister Hardy Foundation for Ocean Science.

Does the Commission intend to factor in any such new evidence when making its recommendations to the
Council prior to this December’s Fisheries Council meeting?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(19 November 2003)

The Commission values the knowledge and experience of commercial fishermen and encourages them to
make their views available to the scientific agencies that advise the Commission as well as directly to the
Commission. However, when making a basis for conservation proposals that will have a large impact on
fishing communities,
it is appropriate to accord higher importance to the results of systematic and
scientifically-designed surveys and monitoring systems than to anecdotal observations.

The work referred to indicates a northward shift in copepod distributions and the effect of this on
distributions of
the remaining
fish is not clear. However, both science and industry concur that
aggregations of cod are now located further north than their historic distribution patterns. In previous
cases of stock collapse it has been the case that as fish stocks become smaller their area of distribution
shrinks as the last few fish aggregate in the most favourable areas.

Indications of a reduction in the distribution of fish onto a smaller area are therefore an additional warning
sign that the stock is at a low level and very vulnerable to exploitation.

The Commission will effectively have such factors in mind when preparing relevant conservation
proposals.