WRITTEN QUESTION P-0513/00 by Dirk Sterckx (ELDR) to the Commission. Removal of dead animals.
20. 2. 2001 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 53 E/5 (2001/C 53 E/007) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0485/00 by Albert Maat (PPE-DE) and Jan Mulder (ELDR) to the Commission Subject: Continuation of the ornamental flowers promotional fund (24 February 2000) 1. During the budget negotiations for 2000 Parliament adopted an amendment saying that the existing rules needed to be evaluated in the near future (before the end off 1999) and that the promotional fund should then be continued but on a new legal basis. The Council also adopted a decision on these lines at second reading. A sum of € 3 million was budgeted for this. The deadline has now passed without the Commission having responded to the amendment. In what way, and when, does the Commission intend to respond to the express wish of the budgetary authority to take the measures necessary to continue the scheme? 2. Concessions have been made by the Union in respect of ornamental flowers in agreements with Egypt, South Africa and Mexico. For example, in a communication of 18 January 2000 on the free-trade agreement with Mexico, the Commission states: The EC will obtain full and rapid access for a number of its key export priorities such as wines, spirits and olive oil In exchange for these concessions the package includes partial liberalisation for certain products of interest to Mexico such as concentrated orange juice, avocados, and cut-flowersí, In order to remain competitive in this open and extremely liberal context, continuation of the promotional fund is essential (bearing in mind that the EUís commercial policy prompted the setting up of the scheme). Does the Commission share this view? Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (11 April 2000) The Commission is aware that additional funds have been allocated for Chapter 38, item 3800 of the 1. Community budget. Furthermore, it would remind the Honourable Members that Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 2275/96 of 22 November 1996 introducing specific measures for live plants and floricultural products (1) stipulates that áthe measures referred to in Article 1 may be granted Community funding for a period of no more than three years. An evaluation study shall be carried out in the final yearí. The results of this study will be available in the second half of 2000. The Commission will not be in a position to decide whether to continue the promotional scheme in the ornamental flowers sector until it has received these results. The Commission considers that the promotional fund may help to guarantee a balanced market in 2. this sector. (1) OJ L 308, 29. 11. 1996. (2001/C 53 E/008) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0513/00 by Dirk Sterckx (ELDR) to the Commission (17 February 2000) Subject: Removal of dead animals there are substantial variations between Member States and even between regions It appears that concerning the policy on removal of dead animals. In Flanders, dead animals have to be collected by an organisation for a fixed fee ranging from BEF 5000 to BEF 20 000 a year, depending on the size of the farm. In other areas removal is completely free of charge. On the other hand, Flemish farmers have noted that dead animals in the United Kingdom are collected by local hunts, which use them to feed their hounds. C 53 E/6 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 20. 2. 2001 Does not the Commission think that a European regulation would end these differences, which can 1. seriously disrupt competition between Member States and regions? Is the Commission aware of practices in United Kingdom? If not, could the Commission investigate 2. them? 3. Does the Commission intend to draw up a European regulation? Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission (21 March 2000) 1. The Commission is aware that financial support for the processing and disposal of animal waste, including dead animals, varies in the different Member States and that such differences could affect the conditions of competition between agricultural products. The Commission is reflecting on the possibility of proposing harmonized rules on this issue at Community level. 2. Article 7 of Council Directive 90/667/EEC of 27 November 1990, laying down the veterinary rules for the disposal and processing of animal waste, for its placing on the market and for the prevention of pathogens in feedstuffs of animal or fish origin and amending Directive 90/425/EEC (1) establishes that Member States may authorize in exceptional cases and under the supervision of the competent authority, the use of animal waste referred to in Article 3(1) (a), (b) (i. e. dead animals) and (e), provided it comes from animals which were not slaughtered as a result of the presence or suspected presence of a notifiable diseases, for the feeding of zoo, circus or fur animals, recognized packs of hounds and maggot farming for fishing bait. This derogation is not just limited to United Kingdom. Member States may also authorize the local distribution, through intermediaries already authorised on the date of adoption of Directive 90/667/ EEC, of small quantities of the above animal waste for use as food for animals whose flesh is not intended for human consumption, provided that the competent authority considers that this entails no risk to human or animal health. Council Decision 95/348/EC of 22 June 1995 laying down the veterinary and animal health rules applicable in the United Kingdom and Ireland to the treatment of certain types of waste intended to be marketed locally as feedstuffs for certain animal categories (2) establishes the rules applicable in the United Kingdom and Ireland to the special treatment of this animal waste intended to be marketed locally though these authorised intermediaries. 3. A proposal for a Council and Parliament regulation establishing new rules for the disposal and the processing of animal waste is in preparation. Its submission to the Council and to the Parliament is scheduled for June 2000. (1) OJ L 363, 27. 12. 1990 ü Directive last amended by the 1994 Act of Accession. (2) OJ L 202, 26. 8. 1995. (2001/C 53 E/009) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0534/00 by Raffaele Costa (PPE-DE) to the Commission (28 February 2000) Subject: Customs 2000 (1996-2000) Could the Commission list the regional and/or national administrative authorities and public or private organisations to which sums or contributions have been allocated, stating the amount involved and whether or not payments have already been made, for each of the various actions included in the Customs 2000 programme (1996-2000) (which has a budget of ECU 50 million, or approximately ITL 97 billion) in Italy and in the other Member States? Has any action been taken to check that the funds were used for their intended purpose and the projects successfully implemented?