WRITTEN QUESTION E-1980/99 by Markus Ferber (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Polish tariffs on yoghurt imported from the EU.
C 225 E/40 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 8. 8. 2000 What does the Commission intend to do to ensure that the energy taxation directive currently in preparation takes account of the importance of peat in regional energy production? Does the Commission propose in future to define peat as an intrinsically renewable resource? Does the Commission intend to ensure that the efficient use of peat remains possible in future for the purpose of energy production in the Nordic countries? (1) OJ C 139, 6. 5. 1997, p. 14. Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission (3 December 1999) The Commission proposal for a Council directive on a Community framework for the taxation of energy products, mentioned by the Honourable Member, deals with all energy products, including peat. Peat whether or not agglomerated is covered by article 2, paragraph 1(c) of the proposal as falling under combined nomenclature code number 27 03. The Commission considers that the proposed directive establishes a flexible Community framework for the taxation of energy products such as peat, which makes it possible for Member States to restructure their national tax systems to attain national objectives in environment, employment, transport and energy policies, while respecting a key Community achievement: the single market. The Commission further considers that fuel peat has specific characteristics which makes it difficult to classify. As an organic material formed over several thousand years by the accumulation of plant debris under anaerobic water-logged conditions, peat contains most of the organic compounds of the original plants which formed it and could therefore be regarded as an organic based fuel. Nevertheless, the Commission, due to the renewal time of several thousand years, does not consider fuel peat as an intrinsically renewable resource. This is in line with the Intergovernmental Panel on climate change (IPCC) Guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories under the United Nations framework Convention on climate change (UNFCCC). The Commission is aware of the importance of peat as a regional energy resource, which contributes to energy supplies, in particular in isolated areas. Security of energy supplies is one of the key energy objectives pursued by the Commission. Diversification and exploitation of indigenous energy resources, including the use of peat in the Nordic Member States and elsewhere in the Community, is an important policy in this respect. Moreover, national policies that combine production of peat with conservation of significant peatland areas and an appropriate implementation of an after-use policy could have a positive life-cycle impact on overall greenhouse gas emissions from peat production and use. The role of peat as an energy source is further analysed in a technical and scientific study commissioned by the Commission, entitled Evaluation of the fuel peat industry in the enlarged European Unioní and carried out jointly by a number of peat research organisations in the Community. A copy of the study is forwarded to the Honourable Member as well as to the Secretariat General of the Parliament. (2000/C 225 E/040) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1980/99 by Markus Ferber (PPE-DE) to the Commission (5 November 1999) Subject: Polish tariffs on yoghurt imported from the EU Polish tariffs have been progressively phased out as part of the Europe Agreement. The tariffs on fruit yoghurts gave fallen from 35 % in 1995 to 30 % (1996), 25 % (1997), 20 % (1998) to the current level of 9-12 %. In April 1999 the Polish authorities abolished the 9 % preferential tariff for fruit yoghurt with a fat content greater than 3,5 %, since when the GATT tariff of 35 % has applied. 8. 8. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 225 E/41 On 24 August 1999 Poland announced application of the safeguard clause for all fruit yoghurt imported from the EU under the Europe Agreement. Mr Plewa, Polish Deputy Minister, announced, firstly, application of the clause for a period of two years; secondly, an EU import quota (16 000 t for 2000 and 17 000 t for 2001); and, thirdly, application of the preferential tariff for imports under the quota and a 29 % tariff on imports not covered by the quota. These measures have an extremely distorting effect on the market and they prevent fair competition between EU producers and Polish producers. In general the economic climate is no advantage to EU yoghurt producers. The export refund which has been the subject of considerable criticism from Poland amounts to 14 % of the price ex frontier, while the tariff is 12 %. Consequently, the price of untreated milk is 30-40 % below that of German milk. 1. What is the Commissionís attitude to the foregoing? 2. What action will the Commission take to stop firms with registered offices in the European Union being placed at a disadvantage? Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission (8 December 1999) The Polish Government informed the Commission in a note verbale dated 24 March 1999 that it was invoking a safeguard clause in respect of the importation of flavoured yoghurt from the Community falling within headings 0403 10 (flavoured or containing added fruit, nuts or cocoa) and 0403 10 93 0 (other yoghurt containing between 3 % and 6 % of milk fat). The Communityís preferential tariff for these products was 9 %; this was raised to 35 %. The Polish Government justifies the measure on the grounds of the massive increase in imports of flavoured yoghurts from the Community in 1998. Total imports of such products rose from 552 tonnes in 1996, to 4 601 tonnes in 1997 and 30 900 tonnes in 1998. In the first half of 1999, imports of flavoured yoghurt from the Community reached 39 000 tonnes (January to May 1999). In 1998 Community yoghurt accounted for 25 % of the total Polish domestic market for all types of yoghurt. Poland also points out that in addition to introducing an import duty of 9 % in 1999 for yoghurt of these headings under Protocol 3, the Community increased the export refund for this category of products. The Commission immediately objected to Polandís use of Article 30 of the Europe Agreement between the Community and its Member States and Poland as justification for applying a safeguard clause, and replied with a note verbale of 27 May 1999, after the position had been discussed in the Agriculture and Fisheries Sub-Committee on 13 and 14 April 1999. Pursuant to the third sub-paragraph of Article 33(2), both sides agreed to hold technical consultation meetings to set a timetable for removing the safeguard measures as soon as circumstances allowed. Following the third technical consultation meeting on 24 August 1999, the Polish side notified the Commission of an amendment to the safeguard measures. Poland has given assurances that these are temporary measures, for two years only, and that a quota will be opened for the community on the basis of average exports from 1996 to 1998 (16 000 tonnes in the first year, 17 000 tonnes in the second year), to which the duty provided for in Protocol 3 shall apply. The immediate application of a duty of 29 % on Community exports in 1999 and on imports above the quota in 2000 and 2001 is equivalent to most-favoured-nation status, compared with the 100 % applied to other third countries. The Commission has noted the new measures, applicable from 17 September 1999, and reserves the right to ask Poland to suspend the measures depending on how the Polish market develops