WRITTEN QUESTION E-0888/04 by Bob van den Bos (ELDR) to the Commission. Slaughterhouses in Greece.
Date: 2004-03-22
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Food and Veterinary Office, Greece, animal welfare, application of EU law, meat processing industry, veterinary inspection

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/901

(2004/C 84 E/0995)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0886/04

by Piia-Noora Kauppi (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(22 March 2004)

Subject: Road toll system

The proposal for a new EU road toll system for heavy goods vehicles came to nothing on account of
disputes between the EU’s peripheral states and transit states.

Strict Community rules ought to be adopted regarding road tolls for HGVs instead of numerous disparate
practices, and the system should not leave any scope for interpretation.

It has been suggested in the media that the failure of the proposal may mean a delay of at least a year
before any decision is taken. Yet when the new Member States join the EU on 1 May, the situation on
Europe’s roads will only become more difficult unless rules enter into force this spring.

Now that the proposal has failed, how does the Commission intend to proceed in order as soon as possible
to put an end to the present free-for-all regarding tolls?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(30 April 2004)

As the Honourable Member suggests in her written question, the common rules on charging HGVs for the
use of road infrastructure (1) ought to be tightened. What is at stake is the smooth operation of the internal
market.

At the Transport Council of 9 March 2004 the Member States failed to reach political agreement on the
text of the future directive, due notably to differences of opinion on the principle of the Commission’s
proposal that revenue from charging must be allocated to the transport sector. However, it cannot be said,
at this stage in the discussions, that the proposal has failed. With regard to the Council, the Irish
Presidency and the Commission are doing all they can to secure political agreement on this dossier as soon
as possible. Meanwhile, on 21 April 2004 Parliament adopted an opinion at
first reading on the
Commission’s proposal.

(1) Directive 1999/62/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 1999 on the charging of heavy

goods vehicles for the use of certain infrastructures, OJ L 187, 20.7.1999.

(2004/C 84 E/0996)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0888/04

by Bob van den Bos (ELDR) to the Commission

(22 March 2004)

Subject: Slaughterhouses in Greece

In the conclusions of a report by the Commission’s Food and Veterinary Office (FVO) on a mission it
undertook to Greece in July 2003, reference is made to the fact that many Greek slaughterhouses still
demonstrate serious shortcomings as regards compliance with EU requirements. Although the competent
authorities have provided the Commission services with guarantees that they will complete planned
actions, the FVO inspectors still found deficiencies in administrative structures, operational standards and
in animal welfare and veterinary supervision.

Can the Commission say what action it will take, or has already taken, to improve the situation of
slaughterhouses in Greece? Does this action include sanctions? If so, what are they, and when will it
impose them?

C 84 E/902

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(30 April 2004)

The draft report of the mission of July 2003 to Greece (Ref: 9176/2003) on the production and placing on
the market of fresh meat was sent to the Greek authorities for comment on 21 August 2003.

In their response of 30 September to the draft report, the Greek authorities gave assurances that official
approval to market meat in the Community had been withdrawn from the slaughterhouses and cutting
plants where serious deficiencies had been observed during the mission. In addition, standard forms for the
monitoring of establishments had been sent by the central competent authorities in Athens to all
prefectures in Greece, requiring them to assess and report back on the situation in the red-meat sector.

In their letter of 17 February 2004 and accompanying action plan, in response to the final report of the
mission, the Greek authorities mainly repeated the information given in reply to the draft report. The
action plan did not contain anything to indicate that the report’s recommendations were being addressed
satisfactorily.

sent an administrative infringement

In the light of this and other findings during recent FVO missions in Greece, the Commission services, on
27 February 2004,
regarding
understaffing in the services responsible for food safety and veterinary controls seeking a response, within
a short deadline, to concerns expressed by the Commission services. The answer received from the Greek
authorities does not respond satisfactorily to those concerns. Therefore, the Commission will now initiate
infringement proceedings against Greece on these matters. A further administrative letter will shortly be
sent to the Greek authorities regarding animal welfare concerns.

to the Greek authorities

letter

In addition, other food safety and veterinary matters on which satisfactory written assurances have been
received from the Greek authorities will be the subject of further on-the-spot checks during FVO missions
to Greece planned for later this year.

(2004/C 84 E/0997)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0890/04

by Margrietus van den Berg (PSE) to the Commission

Subject: Authorisation for flying instructors to give instruction

(22 March 2004)

In my constituency of Northern Netherlands, I was recently approached about the fact that, with a view to
achieving unification, agreements have apparently been concluded which make it impossible for self-
employed flying instructors to continue to train learner-pilots for their pilot’s licence examinations. Such
instruction must now be given by a training establishment. As a result, a large number of instructors have
lost their jobs, although the state had initially invested a lot of money in them. Unification concerns the
implementation of aviation legislation and regulations, the Joint Aviation Requirements and the granting of
aircrew authorisations.

Can the Commission state whether it is true that this situation has come about as a result of

1.
European unification?

2.

Can it explain the need for it or where the added value arises?

Does not the principle of subsidiarity apply in this instance? Or is the decision involved merely a

3.
matter for the Netherlands?

Should not something be done about it, given that we are witnessing the effects of a centralised

4.
bureaucracy and a waste of capital resources?