WRITTEN QUESTION P-0057/00 by Brian Simpson (PSE) to the Commission. Erika oil spillage disaster.
C 303 E/136 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 24. 10. 2000 Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (22 February 2000) In Parliament and Council Directive No 95/2/EC of 20 February 1995 on food additives other than colours and sweeteners (1) provisions are laid down for the use of nitrates and nitrites in certain meat, dairy and fish products. For cheese and fish products and for cured bacon the permitted levels are expressed only as a residual amount. For other meat products an indicative added amount is given in addition to the residual amount. This is the approach that the Council and the Parliament approved when the Directive was adopted in 1995. The limits were set in order to attain the necessary effect of preservation and to correspond with the estimated safety of these food additives. However, these limits are presently the subject of proceedings in the Court of justice brought by Denmark against the Commission in case C-3/00. The Honourable Memberís questions, therefore are related to the subject matter of those proceedings and need to be dealt with in that forum. Nevertheless, as mentioned in the white paper on food safety, the Commission has already indicated that it proposes to undertake a general revision of the directive this year. As part of the review, the Commission will take into account any new scientific findings that have become available. (1) OJ L 61, 18. 3. 1995. (2000/C 303 E/146) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0057/00 by Brian Simpson (PSE) to the Commission (18 January 2000) Subject: Erikaí oil spillage disaster On 12 December 1999 the oil tanker Erikaí broke up 70 km south of FinistŁre off the French coast. The resulting oil spillage has left France facing one of Europeís worst ever ecological disasters. Following similar disasters ü the Amoco Cadizí in 1978, the Braerí in 1993 and the Sea Empressí in 1996 ü a raft of legislation has been put in place under the aegis of Marpol and the European Union. None of these accidents need have happened or need have caused the damage they did once they had happened. The evidence unfortunately suggests that controls on the passage of oil by sea are still too weakly enforced to give real protection. What action does the Commission intend to take in the light of the Erikaí disaster in terms of both safety at sea and the immediate environmental consequences? Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission (23 February 2000) Regarding the action to take in the light of the Erika disaster in terms of safety at sea and environmental impact, the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its declaration during the January plenary session of the Parliament. tankers. It should focus priorities for actions including the strengthening of As regards the safety of oil tankers, the Commission decided to prepare a communication which aims to provide a strong reply from the Community on the risk of major pollution of the European coastline by the inspections of oil potentially substandard vessels in the ports of the Community. The Commission will propose measures to reinforce the existing directives concerning the classification societies and port state control. It will examine the accelerated phasing-out of single hull tankers and also providing for financial incentives to the rapid introduction of double hull tankers. There should be an examination of possible measures increasing the responsibility of the parties involved in oil transport. This action should focus in the first instance on 24. 10. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 303 E/137 the development of voluntary agreements between cargo owners, as a measure towards improving the current international regime of compensation for damage in case of major accidental pollution. Among the actions taken by the Commission to limit the immediate environmental consequences of the Erika disaster, it facilitated assistance and at an early stage appointed a high level liaison officer on site, serving as a link between the French operational command and the foreign ships which were assisting. Following French requests, immediately passed on by the Commission, 26 kilometers of oil booms from 11 European countries as well as birdwashing machines were immediately made available. Voluntary organisations assisted in particular by taking care of polluted birds. Experts of the Community task force on marine pollution were provided on request to assist the French authorities in the evaluation of the offers of service from private companies within Europe. The task force also coordinated a number of observers from the Member States who were given the opportunity to visit the polluted site and study the response operations in order to learn from the French experience. Finally, the Commission in contact with the French ministry of the Environment is considering the possibilities to support an in-depth survey of the environmental consequences of the oil spill. This will assess the impact of the pollution and of the cleaning techniques used. The results will be of paramount importance for all those dealing with accidental marine pollution. The Commission envisages support to this survey of about 300,000 €. (2000/C 303 E/147) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0058/00 by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Commission (20 January 2000) Subject: Subsidies for feeding sugar The organisation of the sugar market which came into force in 1975 abolished Community subsidies for feeding sugar. Although the Commissionís 1997 proposals concerning Agenda 2000 envisaged a further round of agricultural policy reforms in the European Union, they did not include any recommendations concerning reform of the organisation of the sugar market, in general, and subsidies for feeding sugar, in particular. Will the Commission therefore state: ü why subsidies for feeding sugar were abolished, and ü whether the possibility exists of reintroducing Community subsidies for feeding sugar. Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (14 February 2000) Legal instruments allowing assistance to be granted for the use of sugar in animal feeding-stuffs have always existed within the legislation applicable to the common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector. For these instruments to be implemented however a number of economic conditions would have to be met and it is not considered that this is the case at the present time. Furthermore the Commission is not aware of any requests for assistance within the two sectors directly concerned