WRITTEN QUESTION E-0321/00 by Dana Scallon (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Food safety.
C 330 E/124 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21. 11. 2000 Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission (14 March 2000) The Community managed to reach an agreement with all (133) governments present on the adoption of the Cartagena Protocol on biosafety on 28 January 2000. This is a major international achievement, integrating environment, trade and development concerns in a balanced way with the full support of the developing nations. The Communityís negotiation position was based on the Council conclusions of 13 December 1999. The Protocol addresses the safe transfer, handling and use of living modified organisms (LMOs) that may have an adverse effect on biodiversity with a specific focus on transboundary movements. It establishes an advance informed agreement (AIA) procedure for imports of LMOs intended for introduction into the environment, an alternative procedure for LMOs intended for food, feed and processing (LMO commod- ities) and detailed information and documentation requirements. It specifically incorporates the precau- tionary principle in the operative part of the Protocol. The Protocol also contains provisions regarding confidential information and information-sharing, capacity-building, and financial resources, with special attention to the situation of developing countries and those without domestic regulatory systems as well as an enabling provision for a future liability regime. The Protocol gives the option of applying domestic procedures or the minimum provisions under the Protocol. The latter option is provided as assistance for developing countries without adequate adminis- trative and legislative measures in place for the protection of their biodiversity. This means that the Community will continue to apply its own procedures consistent with the objective and provisions of the Protocol. (2000/C 330 E/138) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0321/00 by Dana Scallon (PPE-DE) to the Commission (11 February 2000) Subject: Food safety Short-term scientific evidence led to problems such as BSE and Thalidomide. Such occasions have dramatically affected the health of humans and animals for the worst and shaken the consumer confidence it in food safety. Will the precautionary principle be applied by the new Authority, and how will interrelate with other institutions such as the World Trade Organisation? The cost of such problems in terms of human misery, not to mention the financial loss, is incalculable. How does the Commission intend determining who bears responsibility and sanctions for not fulfilling that responsibility? Or is the Commission satisfied with the Product Liability Directive being drawn up in a discussion with the European Parliament? Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission (7 April 2000) The Commission adopted a Communication on the precautionary principle with the aim, inter alia, of outlining the Commissionís approach to it and establishing Commission guidelines for its application, as well as providing an input to the debate on this issue, both within the Community and internationally. The Commission considers that applying the precautionary principle is a decision relating to risk manage- ment. The new European food authority will be entrusted with risk assessment and risk communication whereas risk management would remain the preserve of the Commission, Parliament and Council, as appropriate. 21. 11. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 330 E/125 Article 5. 7 of the SPS Agreement of the World trade organisation sets out a framework for sanitary or phytosanitary regulatory measures that affect international trade, where scientific evidence is insufficient. The Commission considers that the guidelines for the application of the precautionary principle proposed in the communication, are not only consistent with Article 5. 7 but also an appropriate tool to apply the said Article. Therefore, the application of this principle should not contravene the international obligations of the Community. With regard to the issue of product liability, the Commission points out that in July 1999 it adopted a green paper (1). The Commission is presently analysing the comments received on the green paper and will present a report on the application of the product liability directive by the end of this year. (1) COM(1999) 396 final ü Liability for Defective Productsí. (2000/C 330 E/139) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0322/00 by Laura GonzÆlez `lvarez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission Subject: Irregularities at the Las CÆrvacas rubbish dump in Madrid (11 February 2000) In response to Petition No 288/97 which was submitted to the European Parliament by the Plataforma Cívica y Ecológica de la Casa de Campo de Valdebebasí, the Commission opened infringement procedure A-98/2162 against Spain for its failure to comply with Directive 75/442/EEC (1) on waste, as amended by Council Directive 91/156/EEC (2). By means of a decree dated 27 March 1998 the Madrid city authorities ordered Vertederos del Norte S. L. to close the illegal and unauthorised rubbish dump at La Dehesa, in the Las CÆrvacas district of Madrid, and instructed the company to clean up the site. Furthermore, the Madrid Regional Directorate-General for Environmental Quality and Assessment ordered the Madrid city authorities to instruct the company to undertake 14 specific projects to seal the dump and clean up the site, including the planting of trees and other forms of vegetation. Despite the issue of such an order the company did not apply any of the remedial measures, for which reason a further instruction was issued on 14 January 1999, ordering the site to be sealed off. On 30 July 1999 the above-mentioned Directorate-General approved the sealing-off and cleansing project submitted by Vertederos del Norte S. L. , which was to be carried out within an eight-month period starting on the date on which the work began. However, no cleaning-up work has so far been undertaken and the rubbish dump is in the same state as it was when it was instructed to close. Can the Commission say what stage has been reached in infringement procedure A-98/2162 against Spain? What are the expected dates for the start and the finish of the project to seal off and clean up the rubbish dump? Could the Commission arrange for the project to be speeded up? Why are the Spanish authorities responsible refusing to notify the Plataforma Cívicaí (which launched the petition) regarding the progress of the project? (1) OJ L 194, 25. 7. 1975, p. 39. (2) OJ L 78, 26. 3. 1991, p. 32. Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission (16 March 2000) Following several complaints concerning illegal rubbish dumps, the Commission has decided to bring an infringement action against Spain. As part of this it delivered a reasoned opinion as a result of the failure to comply with Council Directive 75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on waste in connection with, among other things, the illegal dump at Las CÆrcavas. including that at Las CÆrcavas,