WRITTEN QUESTION E-0698/04 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Tinned food and olive oil.
Date: 2004-03-09
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: CCT duties, agricultural production policy, cannery, common organisation of markets, olive oil, preserved product, production refund, suspension of customs duties, tariff reduction

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/847

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(23 April 2004)

State aid to credit unions serving identified local areas is subject to the general State Aid regulatory
framework and case law, if the conditions set out in Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty are fulfilled. As the
features of credit unions differ in terms of their membership, activities, products, scale and purpose, it is
important to assess the schemes on a case by case basis.

Aid granted to credit unions would have to be examined under the relevant State aid rules, for example
Commission Regulation (EC) No 70/2001 of 12 January 2001 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of
the EC Treaty to State aid to small and medium-sized enterprises (1) or the Commission Guidelines on
national regional aid. It should also be reminded that, according to Commission Regulation (EC) No 69/
2001 of 12 January 2001 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to de minimis aid (1),
financial support granted to an undertaking up to an amount of EUR 100 000 over a period of three years
is not considered to be state aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty.

Where it is found that Credit Unions are deemed to provide a service of general economic interest and
receive State aid for the compensation of
for
compatibility would be carried out to assess whether the derogation provided for under Article 86(2) may
be applied.

the net extra costs of such services, an assessment

The above is intended to provide an overview of the process that may be applied to credit unions in so far
as an examination for State Aid is concerned.

(1) OJ L 10, 13.1.2001.

(2004/C 84 E/0941)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0698/04

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Tinned food and olive oil

(9 March 2004)

The Community’s Mediterranean countries are the world’s largest olive oil producers. This sensitive
product, one of the Mediterranean area’s major agricultural crops, is used for a considerable range of
preserved, semi-preserved and prepared fish and seafood, either as the liquid in which these products are
preserved, or as an ingredient, since it has significant nutritional qualities, and on foreign markets, has
become a synonym for quality and healthy eating.

The production costs faced by Community businesses are much higher than those of their third country
competitors. If the elimination of reimbursements for the production of olive oil for preserving purposes
persists, will the EU reduce or suspend custom duties on imported olive oil, so that Community businesses
can continue to compete with their third country counterparts on an equal footing?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(6 April 2004)

The Community accounts for 80 % of world olive oil production and intra-Community trade in olive oil
makes up the bulk of the world olive oil trade. The international reference prices for olive oil are
determined in the Community. Thus Community manufacturers of food products using olive oil have the
advantage of operating where the biggest supply of olive oil
in the world is to be found. In these
circumstances reducing customs duty on olive oil to be used by food manufacturers would be unjustified
when the market is operating in its normal way.

C 84 E/848

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

In our proposal for a new common market organisation for olive oil and table olives we include provisions
whereby, in the exceptional event of extremely high prices in the Community, it would be possible, in
order to allow the market to be adequately supplied, for customs duties to be suspended fully or in part or
a reduced rate import quota opened. Given the proportion of the world total that Community production
accounts for, the need to use these provisions would rarely occur.

(2004/C 84 E/0942)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0699/04

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(9 March 2004)

Subject: Preserves and olive oil

The Community’s Mediterranean countries are the world’s largest olive oil producers. This sensitive
product, one of the Mediterranean area’s major agricultural crops, is used for a considerable range of
preserved, semi-preserved and prepared fish and seafood, either as the liquid in which these products are
preserved, or as an ingredient, since it has significant nutritional qualities, and on foreign markets, has
become a synonym for quality and healthy eating.

1.
The elimination of reimbursements for olive oil used in producing preserves will considerably
increase production costs for preserved, semi-preserved and other prepared fish and seafood. Has the
Commission actually quantified the prejudice and losses which this kind of measure will cause? If so, what
are the figures?

2. What mechanisms has the Commission provided for in order to ensure that the possible elimination
of these reimbursements does not mean a loss of competitiveness, production, jobs and immediate market
share on the part of the Community preserves industry?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(5 April 2004)

As the Honourable Member himself indicates, foods using olive oil are increasingly valued by consumers
for their nutritional and organoleptic properties and have now become a symbol of quality and healthy
eating. The promotional campaigns mounted by the Community for many years have undoubtedly boosted
this positive perception of olive oil.

Under present circumstances, with foods using olive oil in great demand by an increasing number of
consumers ready to pay a higher price for them, granting a refund is no longer justified. The image of
these products is now such that we consider that withdrawal of the aid will result in no reduction of sales
and hence have no impact on Community manufacturers.

(2004/C 84 E/0943)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0701/04

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(9 March 2004)

Subject: Use of the appellations ‘vintage’ and ‘tawny’ by third countries

The EU Wine Management Committee decided on 10 February 2004 to authorise the use of specific
traditional appellations of wines produced at Community level by third countries such as South Africa or
Australia, whenever the wine produced met a certain series of restricted conditions in accordance to those
obtaining in the Member States. This decision was taken against the votes of the producer countries like
Portugal, and according to the Portuguese press, was adopted the Commission on 23 February.