WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1966/97 by Richard HOWITT to the Commission. Prescribing Cascade Directive for veterinary medicines
22. 1. 98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 21/127 (98/C 21/242) WRITTEN QUESTION P-1961/97 by Karin Riis-Jłrgensen (ELDR) to the Commission (29 May 1997) Subject: Commissionís approaches to Polish Government to abolish pro-environmental measure I will hereby draw your attention to the Polish national regulations to ban the import of cars not having catalytic converters and to ban the import in general of cars older than ten years. Their aim is to reduce the extra pollution caused by the substantial emergence of second-hand cars coming from West European countries. What approaches have the Commission made in this case? Is it true that the Commission has been putting pressure on the Polish Government to abolish these regulations? Is my impression right that the Commission in this case is only interested in forcing the Polish market to be open for western products, irrelevant of the quality? Is it not necessary to support the Polish Government instead, for the sake of health and the environment? Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (3 July 1997) The Commission is aware that the importation of old technology second-hand cars into Poland could have an adverse environmental impact. However, the Polish legislation in question differentiated between the environmental standards applied to the treatment of second-hand vehicles from Poland and from the Community thus permitting Polish vehicles of low environmental standards to continue in circulation whilst vehicles from the Community with similar or higher levels of environmental standards were excluded from import. The Commission requested that Poland approximate its legislation in this area in accordance with the requirements of the Europe Agreement. In line with these provisions and with the pre-accession requirement to improve the level of environmental protection in Poland, it is expected that Polandís decision to approximate its legislation in this regard by 1999 will lead to higher standards of environmental protection in this sector. (98/C 21/243) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1966/97 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (9 June 1997) Subject: Prescribing Cascade Directive for veterinary medicines Does the Commission agree that the Prescribing Cascade Directive unfairly allows veterinary practices to charge higher prices for their medicines due to the monopoly they have over the supply of animal medication? Why can a prescription not be issued to be used at an animal pharmacy, thus saving the customer money and inconvenience? Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (9 July 1997) Article 4 of Council Directive 81/851/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to veterinary medicinal products (1) provides that where no authorised product for a condition exists the Member States may exceptionally, in particular to avoid causing unacceptable suffering to the animal concerned, permit the administration of another product by a veterinarian. The medicinal product has to be administered under his direct personal responsibility to one animal or to a small number of animals or a particular holding. The product used has to be either authorised in the Member State for another species or another condition, or, if the first two possibilities do not apply, for use in human beings. If there is no authorised product available, a veterinary medicinal product may be prepared extemporaneously by a person authorised to do so under national legislation in accordance with the terms of a veterinary prescription. For food-producing animals an extended withdrawal time has to be observed to ensure that food obtained from treated animals does not contain residues harmful to the consumer