WRITTEN QUESTION E-2584/99 by Herbert Bösch (PSE) to the Commission. BSE pathogens in meat-and-bone meal.
8. 8. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 225 E/175 insurance with package holidays include travel agents offering so-called áfree insuranceí as part of the travel package and tour operators refusing to confirm a holiday booking until the customer provides evidence of an equivalent alternative policy. Is the Commission aware of such practices in other Member States, and does it consider that such practices are compatible with EU law? Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission (2 February 2000) The Commission has no specific information nor has it received complaints relating to the practices mentioned by the Honourable Member. The matter is, in Community law, regulated by Council Directive 90/314/EEC of 13 June 1990 on package travel, package holidays and package tours (1). Article 4(1)(b) requires the organiser or retailer to provide the consumer, in writing or any other appropriate form, with áinformation on the optional conclusion of an insurance policy to cover the cost of cancellation by the consumer or the cost of assistance, including repatriation, in the event of accident or illness. í. In case the practices referred to by the Honourable Member appeared prima facie to infringe upon the implementing measures ü for example by Directiveís provisions as complemented by the national imposing compulsory instead of optional insurance ü it would appear appropriate that the issue be taken up with the national authorities. In addition, it would seem advisable for consumers confronted with dubious contractual arrangements to contact a consumer organisation, with a view to assessing the legitimacy of the practices in question and considering the most effective course of action. With regard to competition law, the practice of making the sale of one product conditional upon the purchase of another unrelated product, or átyingí as this is also known, can constitute an infringement of the Community competition rules if the undertaking carrying out this practice enjoys a dominant position on the market, or if the practice arises as a result of an agreement between undertakings. The Honourable Member does not allege that travel agents in the United Kingdom have agreed among themselves to oblige consumers to combine the purchase of insurance with a travel package, while the Commission has no reason to believe that any travel agent or tour operator enjoys a dominant position in the United Kingdom. Under these circumstances, there would appear to be no reason for the Commission to open an investigation under the competition rules. (1) OJ L 158, 23. 6. 1990. (2000/C 225 E/193) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2584/99 by Herbert Bösch (PSE) to the Commission (11 January 2000) Subject: BSE pathogens in meat-and-bone meal According to a report on 26 August 1999 on Swiss German language television, there is evidence that EU provisions on the destruction of any BSE pathogens during the production of meat-and-bone meal were disregarded in Switzerland up to the end of 1997. The report indicates that the Swiss producers at that time were unable in purely technical terms to heat the meat-and-bone meal as prescribed at pressure of 3 bar for 20 minutes at 133o C. Nonetheless, official export papers were issued, on the basis of which thousands of tonnes of meat-and-bone meal were exported from Switzerland into the EU area. C 225 E/176 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 8. 8. 2000 1. Is the Commission aware of this case? Did the Commission check bone meal imported from Switzerland? If so, what was the result of the 2. checks? 3. 4. 5. 6. Into which EU Member States was Swiss meat-and-bone meal imported up to 1997? Is there information on how this meat-and-bone meal entered the food chain? Did the Commission take steps to prevent further imports of meat-and-bone meal from Switzerland? Is the Commission aware of any further such cases? Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission (14 February 2000) The Commission is not familiar with the facts mentioned by the Honourable Member and intends to request the Swiss authorities for more detailed information. The Commission will notify the Honourable Member once it has received these particulars. Generally speaking the Swiss health authorities keep a very close eye on trends in Community regulatory activity and integrate into their national legal order certain decisions adopted by the Member States. Hence, in May 1996 they began introducing into their regulations prescriptions equivalent to those provided for in Council Decision 96/449/EC of 18 July 1996 on the approval of alternative heat treatment systems for processing animal waste with a view to the inactivation of spongiform encephalopathy agents (1) (since replaced by Council Decision 1999/534/EC of 19 July 1999 on measures applying to the treatment of certain animal waste to protect against transmissible spongiform encephalopathy and amending Com- mission Decision 97/735/EC (2)), which laid down minimum criteria for treatment systems to be used in animal waste processing establishments (133o C, 20 minutes, 3 Bar). The Commissionís Food and Veterinary Office has carried out inspection visits to evaluate the measures put in place by the Swiss authorities to control and eliminate bovine spongiform encephalopathy on their territory. These visits have not revealed any shortcomings by comparison with the European rules governing animal waste processing. All the information contained in the inspection reports can be consulted on the Internet at the following address: http://europa. eu. int/comm/dg24/health/vi/index_en. html. (1) OJ L 184, 24. 7. 1996. (2) OJ L 204, 4. 8. 1999. (2000/C 225 E/194) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2587/99 by Marialiese Flemming (PPE-DE) to the Commission Subject: Hunting of migratory birds in Italy (11 January 2000) With Council Directive 79/409/EEC (1) on the conservation of wild birds the European Union declared its support to the conservation of all species of wild birds naturally occurring in the European territory of the Member States. Italy has not to my knowledge transposed the directive on the conservation of wild birds. In some regions of Italy hunting is permitted of species (e. g. chaffinch, tree sparrow, starling, blackbird) that are not classed as species which may be hunted under Annex II. Furthermore, hunting with nets takes place, for example, although Article 8 of the directive prohibits the use of non-selective hunting methods