WRITTEN QUESTION P-0771/00 by Jens-Peter Bonde (EDD) to the Council. Opting out of cooperation.
C 26 E/110 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 26. 1. 2001 Joint answer to Written Questions P-0768/00 and P-788/00 given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission (6 April 2000) The Commission has been informed about the disease occurring in dairy cattle farms in the Netherlands by the Dutch authorities in the framework of Article 10 of Council Directive 90/425/EEC of 26 June 1990 concerning veterinary and zootechnical checks applicable in intra-Community trade in certain live animals and products with a view to the completion of the internal market (1), which establishes provisions on the information to be provided in the event of an animal disease that is likely to constitute a serious hazard to public or animal health. The matter has been reviewed during two recent meetings of the standing veterinary committee. The Dutch authorities indicate that in a number of dairy cattle farms emaciation of milking cows has been reported, that these farms are specially checked by the Animal health service, and that investigations are being carried out to identify the precise causes of this disease. The results of these investigations suggest that in some farms the disease appeared after the use of a vaccine, which was contaminated with bovine viral diarrhea virus. This is a well-known virus of ruminants widespread in most countries in the world. There is no evidence or suspicion that it can affect human beings. In these farms all animals have been slaughtered and destroyed. However, in other farms the presence of infectious agents has not been confirmed and other causes (deficiency in cobalt and vitamin B12) are probably involved. Special instructions have been given to ensure that any cattle disease is immediately and properly reported to the authorities. The information so far available suggests that there is no particular risk for public health. However, the meat and other products (including milk) from unhealthy cattle are not used for human consumption, in accordance with Community legislation. The rapid alert system has not been used in these circumstances as it only concerns products that have already been placed on the market. An on-the spot inspection by the Commissionís Food and Veterinary Office was carried out in the Netherlands in November 1999, as part of the ongoing assessment of implementation of Directive 92/46/ EC in Member States. This Directive requires Member States to ensure that milk producing farms are subject to regular inspections and that milk for human consumption must come from cattle which are healthy. This mission was carried out before this problem was identified. However, the report of this mission indicated that a procedure of the controlling authority for milk and milk-products (COKZ) is in force to prohibit the delivery of milk for human consumption in case of unsatisfactory results of the controls carried out. The Commission is following the situation very carefully to ensure the protection of public and animal health. A further inspection visit by the Food and Verterinary Office is planned in the very near future in the matter. A report on this visit will be prepared in the normal manner and will be circulated to the Parliament. (1) OJ L 224, 18. 8. 1990. (2001/C 26 E/136) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0771/00 by Jens-Peter Bonde (EDD) to the Council (13 March 2000) Subject: Opting out of cooperation Would the Council make sure that a country is able to opt out of EU cooperation or parts thereof, such as EMU cooperation, for instance, if this is what the country in question itself wishes, without the need for the other Member States to agree to this? 26. 1. 2001 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 26 E/111 Reply (8 June 2000) The Treaty contains no specific provisions concerning a Member Stateís withdrawal, whether it be from the EU in general or the third phase of EMU. (2001/C 26 E/137) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0779/00 by Nicholas Clegg (ELDR) to the Commission (16 March 2000) Subject: Common commercial policy and the IGC In the Commissionís opinion on the Intergovernmental Conference it proposed that the provisions of the common commercial policy, including qualified-majority voting in the Council, should be extended to agreements on services and intellectual property. Can the Commission confirm that the extension of the CCP will cover all services without exception, including those in the cultural field and audiovisual services in particular? Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission (7 April 2000) The Commissionís opinion on the Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) does not make any distinction between types of services for the purposes of extending the provisions on commercial policy in Article 133 (ex Article 113) EC Treaty. (2001/C 26 E/138) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0789/00 by Lord Inglewood (PPE-DE) to the Commission (9 March 2000) Subject: The Common Agricultural Policy In response to a Written Question from Lord Inglewood in the House of Lords (PQ 788 written 28 February 2000) Lady Hayman, the Minister of State, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food said that áthe Common Agricultural Policy as currently structured does not serve farmers, consumers and taxpayers wellí. Does the Commission agree? Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (29 March 2000) The common agricultural policy (CAP) is an evolving policy. It has developed ever since its introduction to improve its contribution to the objectives laid down in Article 33 (ex Article 39) of the EC Treaty. With the 1992 reforms and the recent Agenda 2000 reforms, fundamental re-orientations of the CAP have been introduced in order to increase internal and external competitiveness, and the quality orientation of agricultural production, to ensure a fair standard of living for the farming community, to better integrate environmental goals into the CAP and to enhance rural development and the creation of complementary or alternative income and employment opportunities