WRITTEN QUESTION P-0688/04 by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission. Application of Regulation No 1788/2003 Article 10(3).
Date: 2004-03-04
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Azores, agricultural quota, dairy farm, dairy production, milk, regulation of agricultural production

C 84 E/654

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-0679/04 and E-0680/04
given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(6 April 2004)

Member States are required to maintain and enforce strict controls on imports of animal products,
including personal
to avert both animal health and public health risks. The Commission
recognises that a big risk factor is the importation of bush meat carried by passengers for their personal
consumption.

imports,

To strengthen controls for animal products carried by passengers for their personal consumption including
for all illegal importations, the Commission recently adopted Commission Decision 2002/995/EC (1). This
lays down rules which prevent, with limited exemptions, the import of all personal consignments of meat
and milk into the EU, and includes the provision for Member States to implement controls on passengers
at all EU passenger entry points from third countries.

A free multi-language poster was also developed and distributed for use in airports to improve awareness
of the public to the tightened rules for products of animal origin accompanying passengers in their
personal luggage. The Commission has also prepared and sent out a follow-up questionnaire to Member
States on the results of these new controls in order to gain feed-back from the Member States on this
problem.

Building on the information gained from the questionnaire and also from working groups with Member
States experts, the Commission intends to adopt shortly a Regulation to replace Commission Decision
2002/995/EC with the aim to improve and tighten controls.

The Regulation will not only strengthen existing rules but give the Member States greater scope to
improve enforcement, and explicitly penalise those passengers that are found to be in breach of the rules.

To complement these actions, the Food and Veterinary Office are also proposing to carry out a mission to
several Member States soon to look at the effectiveness of the application by the Member States of the
controls laid down in Community legislation, including the problem of illegal imports.

(1) Commission Decision 2002/995/EC of 9 December 2002 laying down interim safeguard measures with regard to

imports of products of animal origin for personal consumption, OJ L 353, 30.12.2002.

(2004/C 84 E/0738)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0688/04

by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission

(4 March 2004)

Subject: Application of Regulation No 1788/2003 Article 10(3)

For operational transparency and control reasons, the Azores milk producers’ representative bodies have
claimed that the calculation of the possible reallocation of the unused parts of the reference quantity be
made not only at the level of each buyer and national level, but also at the intermediate level of the
regions.

Does the Commission believe that this request contradicts the ‘objective criteria’ referred to in Regulation
(EC) No 1788/2003 Article 10? (1)

Is the Commission aware of any case in which the Member State is going to make use of this intermediate
stage in the reallocation of reference quantities?

(1) OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 123.

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/655

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(1 April 2004)

Article 10(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1788/2003 of 29 September 2003 establishing a levy in the
milk and milk products sector clearly lays down the two ways in which unused quantities are to be
reallocated, one exclusively at national level, the other firstly at the level of the purchaser and thereafter at
national level where appropriate. This at once rules out any regional stage.

It is for the sake of sound management and so as not to weaken the role of the purchaser that the regional
level is not referrred to in Article 10(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1788/2003.

For deliveries it was agreed to give purchasers prime managerial responsibility for the declaration of milk
levy. That is why unused quantities can be reallocated at
collected and collection of the additional
purchaser level.

Thus the system is not compatible with regionalised management. Purchasers’ collection areas are not
necessarily bounded by regional borders (cid:1) they may collect milk in more than one region.

(2004/C 84 E/0739)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0691/04

by Dominique Souchet (NI) to the Commission

(9 March 2004)

Subject: Systemic insecticides

On 23 February, the French Ministry of Agriculture announced a ban on the sale of any products
containing Fipronil, an insecticide molecule, as a preventative measure following the charges brought
against Bayer Crop over the possible toxicity to human or animal health of agricultural products
containing this molecule.

Does the Commission intend to draw any particular conclusions from the decision to introduce a ban in
keeping with the precautionary principle?

With regard to beekeeping more specifically, does the Commission plan to take measures identical to those
taken in France?

How does the Commission intend to follow up the resolution on measures to improve the production and
marketing of honey (A5-0381/2001), adopted by the European Parliament on 13 December 2001, which
noted that ‘extremely serious damage has been caused to bee populations in several Member States by
systemic insecticides with extremely long residual activity periods’?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(6 April 2004)

The Commission has taken note of the declaration of 23 February 2004 of the French Minister of
Agriculture that national authorisations of products containing fipronil are to be suspended pending a
position on the substance by the European Food Safety Authority. The Commission notes that the
products are marketed in France by BASF and not by Bayer CropScience.

The Commission notes that this reflects a precautionary approach by the French authorities following a
scientific analysis of the fipronil dossier by the French authorities.