WRITTEN QUESTION P-3653/03 by Jean-Louis Bernié (EDD) to the Commission. Interpretative guide to the Birds Directive.
Date: 2003-12-02
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Council of the European Union, EC Directive, bird, dissemination of EU information, hunting regulations, interpretation of the law, provision of documents, user guide

C 84 E/76

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(22 January 2004)

The NGQ distribution decided on by the Council in 1998 took a number of factors into account. Among
them was production during the previous five-year period with extreme production years ruled out. Others
included the circumstances of the sector in the various Member States.

The data yielded by the independent Olistat and Oliarea surveys has confirmed that the NGQ distribution
corresponded to the production structure existing in 1998.

As was the case for the sectors dealt with in the first reform package, we are proposing that the national
ceilings be calculated using the average of the payments received by growers during the reference period.
For olive oil this is the 2000/2001 to 2002/2003 marketing years. This reference period is a key element
of the reform. Its use guarantees consistency of financial treatment of the various CAP sectors.

At our request, the International Olive Oil Council re-examined its statistical series for the Member States
in order to improve consistency between data sets, in particular for market prices.

This analysis of the statistical compilation methods in use showed that in some Member States olive oil
utilisation covered human consumption alone whereas it should also have covered industrial uses and
losses. It was also found that in some Member States marketing structures were such that many figures
could not be known with better than 12 % accuracy.

(2004/C 84 E/0081)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3653/03

by Jean-Louis Bernié (EDD) to the Commission

(2 December 2003)

Subject: Interpretative guide to the Birds Directive

In the answer given by Mrs Wallström on 22 May 2003 to Written Question P-1495/03 (1),
Commission undertook to send me the French version of the interpretative guide to the Birds Directive.

the

When will that guide be sent to me?

When will the guide be submitted to the Committee on the Environment, the European Parliament and the
European Parliament’s Intergroup on hunting, fishing and the environment?

When and how will the guide be applicable, having regard to the most recent judgment of the European
Court of Justice on derogations relating to hunting?

(1) OJ C 58 E, 6.3.2004, p. 73.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(6 January 2004)

The Commission is fully aware of the commitment made in relation to providing the guidance document
to the Parliament as soon as it has been finalised. It has been delayed in this task by the need to
incorporate the judgement of the Court of Justice in Case C-182/02 (preliminary ruling concerning the
interpretation of Article 9(1)(c) of Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of
wild birds (1), referred to it by the French Conseil d’Etat).

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/77

The section of the guide concerning the provisions of Article 7 of Directive 79/409/CEE is already avail-
able in three languages on the following website: (http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/nature/sustain-
able_hunting.htm)

the judgement

in this case has been delivered,

the Commission is proceeding with the
Now that
finalisation of the guide. This will entail completion of the technical and legal revisions of the text and its
translation, initially into French and German. The Commission intends to make the guide available early in
2004 to the Parliament’s Environment Committee, the Intergroup on ‘Fieldsports, Fishing & Conservation’
and individual Members of Parliament who have requested the document.

The objective of the guide is to assist Member States and other relevant interests in the implementation of
the hunting provisions of the Directive. The guide will reflect all the relevant judgements of the Court of
Justice on this subject, including the latest judgement in relation to the provisions of Article 9(1)(c) of the
Directive.

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.

(2004/C 84 E/0082)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3655/03

by Ioannis Marínos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(9 December 2003)

Subject: Counterfeiting of euro notes and coins

Information is now coming to light that forged euro notes are being detected with great frequency in
Eurozone countries. In Greece, in fact, even counterfeit EUR 2 coins have been detected, while the same
source alleges that there is a factory producing forged euro notes in Bulgaria and another producing
counterfeit coins in Turkey. Eurobarometer’s report No 58 sets out the results of a survey demonstrating
that a large number of Eurozone citizens still feel psychologically attached to their former national
currencies, while the euro is also seen as responsible for prices being rounded up. The European Central
Bank has announced that it has formed, in partnership with the major banknote issuing authorities, the
Central Bank Counterfeit Deterrence Group (CBCDG).

Does the Commission consider that the general preparation for the euro’s introduction was adequate, and
that measures to prevent forgery were taken early enough?

Answer given by Mrs Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(2 February 2004)

The fact that the euro was introduced with so little difficulty shows that the preparation was indeed
adequate, not only by the Commission but by all the players. In the words of the Communication (1) from
the Commission to the European Council ‘Review of the introduction of euro notes and coins’: ‘This major
success is due to the quality and extremely thorough nature of the preparations made by the participating
Member States, the European institutions (the European Central Bank and the European Commission), the
national central banks, financial institutions, sales outlets, the police and cash-transport firms and to the
active and enthusiastic participation of the public, without which this operation and the rapid distribution
of euros would not have been possible’ (2).

The public perception of the euro’s introduction is taken seriously by the Commission which will, in 2004,
intensify its communication on the euro and economic and monetary union. Part of the effort will be
designed to dispel the erroneous perception that the euro has lead to price rises and part will concentrate
on good news such as the reduction of costs for cross-border payments.

A substantial number of measures, aimed at increasing the level of the protection of the euro banknotes
and coins against counterfeiting, have been taken by the Commission, the European Central Bank (ECB)
and Europol as well as the Member States.