WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1305/97 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Veterinary checks
22. 1. 98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 21/37 Following the repeal of Directive 90/675/EEC (2) it has become necessary to amend the text of the directive dealt with in the second Commission proposal, with a view to bringing it into line with the new directive proposed by the Council. Would the Commission consolidate the existing legislation at the earliest opportunity, so as to make it clearer and more user-friendly? (1) OJ C 245, 23. 8. 1996, p. 9. (2) OJ L 373, 31. 12. 1990, p. 1. Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (29 May 1997) At present, the Commission has no plans to consolidate the Directives mentioned by the Honourable Member. On the other hand, a number of them (71/118/EEC, 91/492/EEC, 91/493/EEC, 92/45/EEC and 92/118/EEC) are included in a general exercise to group the so-called áverticalí directives on food hygiene in order to simplify the legislation and achieve consistency. With regard to the financing of checks, on 26 June 1996 the Council adopted Directive 96/43/EC amending and consolidating Directive 85/73/EEC (1). (1) OJ L 162, 1. 7. 1996. (98/C 21/112) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1305/97 by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission (11 April 1997) Subject: Veterinary checks The Commission has submitted a proposal for a Council Directive laying down the principles governing the organization of veterinary checks on products entering the Community from third countries, amending Directives 71/118/EEC, 72/462/EEC, 85/73/EEC, 91/67/EEC, 91/492/EEC, 91/493/EEC, 92/45/EEC and 92/118/EEC governing the organization of veterinary checks on products entering the Community from third countries (COM(96)170 final › 96/0109/0110(CNS)) (1), (CES 1395/96 › 96/0109/0110/CNS). So as to obviate the need to refer to the specific customs legislation, would the Commission amend the directive to clarify the powers of the customs authorities and the way in which responsibility is divided between the customs authorities and the veterinary authorities? Does it feel that the directive should make cooperation between the two authorities compulsory and that it should give the competent customs authority, rather than the veterinary authority (as provided for in the proposal for a directive), exclusive responsibility for supervising free warehouses and customs warehouses? (1) OJ C 245, 23. 8. 1996, p. 9. Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (2 June 1997) The proposals for Council Directives laying down the principles governing the organization of veterinary checks on products entering the Community from third countries (1) were examined in detail by Parliament (17-21 February 1997). In that context the Commission accepted a number of amendments to certain provisions adopted by Parliament, in particular to clarify the respective responsibilities of the veterinary and customs authorities. On the particular question raised by the Honourable Member, the Commission has agreed that Article 12(1) of the proposal should provide for the customs authorities and the veterinary authorities responsible for the border inspection post to authorize admission into the free zone, the free warehouse or a customs warehouse. Nevertheless, Article 12(2) stipulates that zones and warehouses must be under the permanent supervision of an official veterinarian. This rule applies without prejudice to the obligations arising from customs regulations. This position is in accord with that expressed by Parliament. (1) COM(96) 170 final