WRITTEN QUESTION E-0245/00 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Refund of resources lost owing to a shortfall in tobacco deliveries.
C 374 E/44 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 28. 12. 2000 Vacancies at Director General level naturally attract broad political interest and it would be surprising 2. if opinions were not informally offered. It is, however, the Commission which clearly takes the final decision once the interview process has been completed, and does so on an objective basis following the Commission rules on nominations which require a double examination of the candidatures. 3. Following his appointment, Mr JosØ Manuel Silva Rodriguez did indeed send a letter to the staff of the Agriculture DG. However, the letter does not express any thanks to Commission Vice-President Mrs Loyola de Palacio. In his message, Mr Silva Rodriguez refers to the confidence that Mrs de Palacio has placed in him since their first meeting. He also mentions the six other Commissioners whom he has had the opportunity of meeting during the course of his Community career. The vacant post of Director-General for Agriculture was advertised inside the Commission and the 4. other European institutions as provided for under Article 29(1)(a) and (c) of the Staff Regulations. The Commission has at all times complied with all the rules governing the appointment of senior 5. officials and with its own decision of 18 September 1999, and will continue to do so. (2000/C 374 E/051) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0245/00 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (7 February 2000) Subject: Refund of resources lost owing to a shortfall in tobacco deliveries The rules governing the common organisation of the market in tobacco provide that, if after the deliveries of all varieties of tobacco, the overall amount delivered is found to be less than the overall quota allocated to the country concerned, supplementary deliveries entitled to premiums up to the size of the overall quota are not permitted. Given that frequently, mainly owing to unfavourable weather conditions, production falls below the quota level and that this measure applicable to deliveries merely means a loss of aid and a reduction in the incomes of tobacco producers. Will the Commission say: 1. Does it intend to consider whether the resources lost owing to a shortfall in tobacco deliveries might be refunded to the tobacco sector? 2. Will it allow additional deliveries with premium entitlements? Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (20 March 2000) Current Community legislation on tobacco does not provide for reacquisition of appropriations lost following a shortfall in tobacco deliveries. Where tobacco deliveries are entitled to a premium, Article 16(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2848/ 98 of 22 December 1998 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2075/92 as regards the premium scheme, production quotas and the specific aid to be granted to producer groups in the raw tobacco sector (1) stipulates that, except in cases of force majeure, producers must deliver their entire production to the first processor by 30 April of the year following the year of harvest for the groups of varieties VI, VII and VIII and by 15 April of the year following the year of harvest for the other groups of varieties, failing which they will lose their entitlement to the premium. However, Article 27(4) of the same Regulation provides that producers who had an abnormally low harvest during the reference period because of bad weather do not lose the right to their quota. 28. 12. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 374 E/45 On the other hand, so that production quotas can be fully utilised, where deliveries are made under cultivation contracts concluded with producer groups, if a producer memberís harvest falls below the maximum quantity to be delivered, quantities from another producer member of the same group whose production exceeds his individual quota can be included in the deliveries entitled to premiums provided that the quantity entered on the quota statement of the producer group in question is not exceeded and that Regulation (EC) No 2848/98, in particular Articles 11, 22 and 24 thereof, is complied with. (1) OJ L 358, 31. 12. 1998. (2000/C 374 E/052) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0248/00 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (7 February 2000) Subject: Impact on Greek agricultural produce of the trade agreement between the EU and South Africa The trade cooperation agreement concluded between the European Union and South Africa has caused considerable concern, notably in Italy and Greece, about the possible consequences for fresh and processed fruit and vegetables in the southern countries of the Union. As regards Greece in particular, the products affected are tinned peaches and apricots, fruit salads and fruit juices and Greek Valencia oranges, whose marketing period coincides in part with that of South African produce. In signing the EU-South Africa agreement did the Commission consider the consequences for fresh and processed Greek and Italian produce? Does it intend to provide for measures (derogations, restrictions on tariff concessions, etc. ) in order to avoid any adverse consequences due to the implementation of this agreement? Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (20 March 2000) In setting out the negotiating mandate of the Commission prior to commencement of negotiations towards the Community/South Africa Agreement on trade, development and co-operation, the Council was very much aware of the sensitivity of the fruit and vegetables sector. Accordingly, in general the Council excluded the most sensitive products in the sector from liberalisation and only accepted in some very specific cases tariff quotas where the quantities were based on current trade flows. For less sensitive products where the Council accepted liberalisation the Commission negotiated such liberalisation to be implemented as late as possible in order to give the sector a reasonable delay to prepare for the new situation. The Honourable Member should also be aware that a joint declaration on agricultural quota annexed to the Agreement (paragraph 2) states that Concerning in particular prepared fruits (peaches, pears and apricots) South Africa agrees to manage its exports to the European Union in a balanced wayí. Finally, the Commission draws the attention of the Honourable Member to Article 15 of the Agreement, which contains a general safeguard clause for agriculture products. Either party to the Agreement may initiate the safeguard procedures under this clause, if imports cause or threaten to cause a serious disturbance on their market