WRITTEN QUESTION E-0056/04 by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Mr Prodi's statement on the need for each Member State or group of Member States to take the initiative and move forward on the basis of reinforced cooperation if the draft constitution is not adopted in the near future.
Date: 2004-01-20
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Constitution, President of the Commission, deepening of the European Union, enhanced cooperation, public statement

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/529

(2004/C 84 E/0604)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0048/04

by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(20 January 2004)

Subject: Location of the European fisheries monitoring agency in Galicia

At the most recent Council meeting held in Brussels under the Italian presidency, in the context of the
decisions on the location of various agencies, it was agreed to create a European fisheries monitoring
agency, to be located in the Spanish state.

Has it already been agreed to locate this agency in Vigo, as has been suggested in Galician government and
media circles?

Given that, according to some reports, the agency will not begin operations until 2005, what are the
current forecasts?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(18 February 2004)

We welcome the decision of the Member States’ representatives, when they met at Head of State and
Government level at Brussels on 13 December, that a European Fisheries Control Agency will be set up
and located in Spain.

It appears that the Spanish Government wishes the agency to be located at Vigo in Galicia but we have no
official confirmation of this choice.

In March we shall be sending the Council and Parliament a proposal for a Regulation establishing the
Agency.

(2004/C 84 E/0605)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0056/04

by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(20 January 2004)

Subject: Mr Prodi’s statement on the need for each Member State or group of Member States to take the
initiative and move forward on the basis of reinforced cooperation if the draft constitution is not
adopted in the near future

Given that reinforced cooperation does not have the effect of strengthening the Union’s democratic
elements, since it marginalises the common institutions, while the EU needs to define the adoption of the
Constitution as proposed by the Convention as an overriding objective, can the Commission explain the
significance of President Prodi’s recent statement to ‘La Repubblica’ in which he apparently assumes that
the Intergovernmental Conference has failed and calls for initiatives for further progress on the basis of
reinforced cooperation to be put forward by a Member State or group of Member States?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(11 March 2004)

The Commission hopes that the work of the Intergovernmental Conference on the draft Constitution can
be concluded as soon as possible, and in any event before the end of 2004. Mr Prodi has warned the
general public that, if work on the Constitution ends in failure, there is a risk that a group of Member
States will wish to proceed with European integration outside the framework of the present Treaties.

C 84 E/530

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

It should be borne in mind that the instrument of reinforced cooperation as provided for in the Treaties by
no means marginalises the European institutions; on the contrary, reinforced cooperation specifically relies
on recourse to the institutions, procedures and mechanisms provided for in the Treaties. Closer
collaboration between certain Member States outside the Treaties clearly could not provide the same
guarantees.

(2004/C 84 E/0606)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0059/04

by Hiltrud Breyer (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(20 January 2004)

Subject: Animal welfare and subsidies following the reform of the CAP

When the reform of the CAP enters into force, subsidies for cattle farmers will be specifically linked to
compliance with EU basic requirements in terms of animal health and welfare. Farmers who fail to observe
these requirements will be subject to cuts in direct payments, as well as the sanctions generally applicable.

How will farms be assessed for animal welfare?

How does the animal welfare factor tie in with subsidies for breeders of fighting bulls, who earn their
living by repeatedly hiring out their animals for bullfights, during which they are left to face hours of
torture, including being injured with lances, having their horns set on fire and being hunted into the sea?
Does the Commission intend to reduce these farms’ subsidies on a permanent basis, since it is clear that
their very nature means that they cannot meet the minimum animal welfare requirements?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(3 March 2004)

In the Commission’s declaration which accompanied the agreement on the Council Regulation on the
reform of the CAP (Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 (1)) it is foreseen that the control of the farmers
in respect of their cross-compliance obligations will normally be the responsibility of the official services
which currently monitor compliance with the relevant animal welfare rules.

The agency responsible for the payment of aid will apply sanctions on the basis of these controls.

The Commission is currently drafting the necessary detailed rules on this subject, in accordance with the
above-mentioned declaration.

Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003, which was adopted in September 2003, following the Parliament’s
opinion, provides that direct payments are subject to cross-compliance, as from 1 January 2007, as regards
animal welfare and in particular as regards Council Directive 98/58/CE of 20 July 1998 on the protection
of animals kept for farming purposes (2). However, bull fighting animals are not covered by this Directive
according to Article 1(2)b thereof, which excludes ‘animals intended for use in competitions, shows,
cultural or sporting events or activities’. Moreover, Article 6(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003
provides that any reduction or exclusion from payments ‘shall only apply if the non-compliance relates to
a) an agricultural activity, b) an agricultural land of the holding …’ Therefore, the treatment received by
these animals in the bull ring is entirely outside the scope of both those Regulations.

Furthermore, the Commission is not aware that the welfare of potential fighting bulls, whilst they are
being reared on the farm is, in practice, inferior to that of animals reared for other purposes.

(1) 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, OJ L 270,
21.10.2003.

(2) OJ L 221, 8.8.1998.