WRITTEN QUESTION E-1712/99 by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Rules on egg collection.
C 219 E/18 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 1. 8. 2000 (2000/C 219 E/024) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1709/99 by HervØ Novelli (PPE-DE) to the Commission (29 September 1999) Subject: Inconsistency between European regional policy and the French authoritiesí decisions The department of Indre-et-Loire is currently under consideration as regards the new zones for application of the reform of European regional policy. The commune of Nouâtre in the canton of Sainte-Maure, which used to be eligible under ERDF Objective 5(b), could now come under Objective 2. However, at the same time, the French authorities have decided to close a large part of the Nouâtre military base, which employs about 400 people, including 250 civilians, which will be a severe blow to the local economy. For instance, the Nouâtre secondary school, which takes the children of employees at the base, may be threatened with closure in the fairly near future. 1. Does not the Commission think that there is an unacceptable contradiction between its regional policy objectives in Indre-et-Loire and the French authoritiesí decision, taken without any consultation, concerning a commune in the same department? Does not the Commission think that it should intervene with the French Government to resolve this 2. inconsistency? 3. More generally, does the Commission know of other, similar cases and what measures will it take to prevent contradictions of this kind in the future? Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission (17 November 1999) It is not up to the Commission to intervene in the decisions of the French authorities concerning the location of military bases or, more generally, to express views about the restructuring of the defence sector. According to Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds (1), Objective 2 of the Funds is to support the economic and social conversion of areas facing structural difficulties. Article 4 of the Regulation goes on to stipulate that Community assistance under this Objective ámay extend to areas facing or threatened by serious structural problems on account of relevant, verifiable characteristics, or a high level of unemployment arising from an ongoing or industrial or service sectorí. This planned restructuring of one or more activities in the agricultural, determining activity can be a military base, the closure of which would have a substantial negative impact on the area in terms of jobs. Envisaging eligibility for Objective 2 for this type of area does not therefore run counter to the terms of the Regulation. It is, however, up to the national authorities to propose to the Commission the areas which they wish to benefit from Objective 2. The Commission, acting in close co-operation with the Member State, will then draw up the list of the areas eligible for this Objective for the period 2000-2006 and will ensure that these areas are the ones most affected by problems of socio-economic restructuring. (1) OJ L 161, 26. 6. 1999. (2000/C 219 E/025) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1712/99 by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (29 September 1999) Subject: Rules on egg collection In northern Sweden, the distances between producers and the central depot where the eggs are quality- controlled and packed are extreme. Before accession to the EU, the eggs were collected once a week and 1. 8. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 219 E/19 could still be dated 25 days ahead. This system never created any problems, particularly as the eggs were kept in cold storage throughout. Since accession, this system has been changed and the eggs have to be collected twice a week in order to be dated 25 days ahead. Can the Commission envisage allowing an exception to this rule in view of the great distances involved? Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (5 November 1999) The Commission has already provided for an exception to the general rule for collecting eggs for Sweden and Finland as requested by the Honourable Member. By Commission Regulation (EC) No 505/98 of 3 March 1998 amending Regulation (EEC) No 1274/91 introducing detailed rules for implementing Council Regulation (EEC) No 1907/90 on certain marketing standards for eggs (1), the following provision was added to Article 1(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 1274/91 of 15 May 1991 (2) on the common marketing standards for eggs: However, in Finland and Sweden delivery or collection from producers to packing centres or to the industry may take place once a week only in those cases where the temperature at which eggs are kept at the farm in artificially maintained below 14°C. (1) OJ L 63, 4. 3. 1998. (2) OJ L 121, 16. 5. 1991. (2000/C 219 E/026) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1732/99 by Giuseppe Nisticò (PPE-DE) to the Council (30 September 1999) Subject: Air fares For some time now both the Commission and the Court of Justice have, in the performance of their respective duties, called on the European airlines to ensure that their activities comply with the principle of free competition and meet the expectations of their customers. Meanwhile, huge amounts of State aid have been granted ü with Commission approval ü to a number of national airlines, including Alitalia. The sector is regulated almost entirely by various Community rules, compliance with which the Commission is required to monitor on the basis of clear rules. However, the fares charged for air travel on Italian domestic flights, particularly flights to southern Italy, work out considerably higher per kilometre than the fares charged on European routes. This situation severely and unfairly limits the development potential of the southern regions and in particular Calabria, given its location. Community legislation suggests that public service contracts are the most suitable means of ensuring that the needs of less-favoured sectors of the population are met. In the course of the public hearings before the European Parliament, President Prodi declared his readiness to endorse Parliamentís initiatives. In view of the foregoing: ü Is the Council satisfied with the way in which the principles and rules laid down by Community legislation are implemented? ü Does the Council regard the public service contract as an instrument that can be used not only by national governments, but also by regional governments? ü Does the Council envisage taking action to establish a common per kilometre rate for air fares to apply to all European countries, possibly within a limited margin of fluctuation, to ensure enhanced cohesion and integration within the Community?