WRITTEN QUESTION E-0823/00 by Michiel van Hulten (PSE) to the Commission. European school milk measure.
6. 3. 2001 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 72 E/7 If, however, no settlement has been reached by the completion of accession negotiations, the Councilís decision on accession will be made without the above being a pre-condition. In this the Council will take account of all relevant factors. In the accession process, each candidate country is judged on its own merits on the basis of the same objective criteria, and the accession of one candidate is not dependent on that of any other. (2001/C 72 E/007) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0823/00 by Michiel van Hulten (PSE) to the Commission (21 March 2000) Subject: European school milk measure the European school milk measure dating from February 1999 A report on an evaluation of (COM(1999) 608) draws the following conclusion: Judged purely against the current, stated documented objectives of the measure that focus principally on maintaining and increasing consumption of milk products and as a surplus disposal tool, the measure has had a marginal positive impact and represents poor value for money in comparison to alternative methods of surplus disposal used. This suggests that the Commission should give serious consideration to withdrawing the measure. í Despite this, on 10 December 1999 the Commission proposed that the measure should be adjusted rather than withdrawn. The proposal reduces the Community contribution from 95 % to 50 % of the cost. The remainder of the cost is to be borne by Member States. The Commission bases its proposal on Community objectives relating to public health. How can the Commission proposal be reconciled with the subsidiarity principle (Article 5 of the EC 1. Treaty) and with the new Commissionís intention of restricting its work to core responsibilities? 2. What scientifically justified public-health objectives does the Commission proposal pursue, and to what extent do/will the existing and proposed measures really help to attain them? 3. What percentage of the school milk budget is spent on administration? What would the correspond- ing figure be under the proposed measure? 4. What financial European Union? impact will the proposed measure have after the proposed enlargement of the Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (2 May 2000) In its proposal of 10 December 1999 (1), the Commission recommends maintaining Community aid 1. for milk distribution in schools, but at a reduced level and part-financed by the Member States. This aid is granted within the framework of the common organisation of the market in the milk and milk products sector and is justified by its direct and indirect impact on milk product consumption. The aid scheme contributes to implementing the CAP and falls therefore within the responsibilities conferred on the Community as such. The Commission recognises that milk distribution in schools also contributes to health and hygiene, 2. food policy and social objectives, but it equally considers, for these very reasons, that Community aid paid out of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF), should be supplemented by a national contribution. The evaluation report cited by the Honourable Member looks into the other objectives referred to above and relates them to the context of the school-milk scheme. 3. The budget allocated to the school-milk scheme is intended in its entirety to provide a discount on the sales price of milk products distributed in schools. Management of the scheme is in the hands of national bodies whose running costs are the responsibility of the national authorities. The Commission proposal does not change this situation. C 72 E/8 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 6. 3. 2001 At this stage, the Commission does not have the data which would enable it to quantify the impact 4. of its proposal in the countries which have applied for membership. (1) OJ C 89 E, 28. 3. 2000. (2001/C 72 E/008) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0860/00 by Rosa MiguØlez Ramos (PSE) and Luis Berenguer Fuster (PSE) to the Commission Subject: Fisheries agreement with Mexico (22 March 2000) the EU-Mexico free trade agreement, Following the recent signing of the Mexican authorities have expressed great satisfaction at the results obtained, inter alia, in the fisheries sector. Recently, a member of the Mexican government proudly stated that Mexico had extremely extensive fishing grounds and low levels of fish consumption ü in other words, the opposite to Europe. The same sources state that as Mexico did not, in the agreement, assume any obligation to grant licences to the EU, there is every likelihood of a large increase in exports of Mexican fish to the EU. What are the provisions on fisheries of the free trade agreement with Mexico? Does it in fact include provision for EU vessels to be licensed to fish in Mexican waters? Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (5 May 2000) The Decision adopted on 23 March 2000 by the Community-Mexico Joint Council, due to come into force on 1 July, provides for creation of a Community-Mexico free-trade area. Most trade in fishery products ü accounting for € 74 million and 0,3 % of total trade ü would be liberalised over a maximum of ten years. Establishment of the free-trade area will naturally result in more trade, to the benefit of both partners. The specific vulnerabilities of the Community industry have however been taken into account by means of deferred or partial (imposition of quotas) liberalisation for certain products. The trade agreement has no provisions on fishery resources. Mexico is not therefore obliged to offer fishing licences to Community vessels. Nor does the agreement make entry into force of the trade concessions conditional on existence of a fishery agreement. Thus any increase in Mexican fish exports to the Community would result not from the lack of a fishery agreement but more accurately from the free-trade agreement. (2001/C 72 E/009) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0862/00 by Marielle De Sarnez (PPE-DE) to the Commission (22 March 2000) Subject: Commission view on the introduction of advertising into state educational establishments For several years now, companies have been insinuating themselves into state educational establishments through advertising, sponsorship, brand-names and distance teaching. This practice, which seeks to turn schoolchildren into consumers, is now taking on worrying proportions in France and in a number of other EU countries and is consequently undermining the established principle of equality in state education. All too often, these private companies take advantage of the lack of resources available to teachers to do their work