WRITTEN QUESTION P-1548/99 by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Commission. Articles of precious metals.
8. 8. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 225 E/3 (2000/C 225 E/003) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1516/99 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission (1 September 1999) Subject: Noise pollution from Malpensa 2000 airport 1. Can the Commission say whether or not the dispute between it and the Italian authorities responsible for running Malpensa airport also relates to the issue of noise pollution caused by arriving or departing aircraft which overfly residential areas at low altitude? If it does, has the Commission any information which would enable it to assess the extent to which 2. the quality of life is diminished in the residential areas concerned? If so, have any proposals been draw up with a view to alleviating the problem and to ensuring that 3. the people affected enjoy an acceptable quality of life during the day and, more particularly, during the night? 4. With regard to the question of transferring the remaining flights from Linate airport, should the probable increase in noise pollution stemming from the possible increase in the number of flights not also be taken into account? Under European environmental law, has the EU any powers and responsibilities relating to noise 5. pollution? Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission (21 October 1999) The litigation before the Court of justice was introduced by the Italian authorities against the Commissionís decision of 16 September 1998 disapproving Italian decree of 5 July 1996 and 13 October 1997 requiring transfer of all traffic from Linate to Malpensa on 28 October 1998 with the exception of the Milan-Rome route. Such decision was found to be contrary to Community law for violation of the principle of non discrimination and the principle of proportionality. The Italian authorities replaced the litigious decree by a new decree allowing 34 % of European flights to remain at Linate for a temporary period until access infrastructures are improved. When adopting such measures, Member States must respect all elements of Community law including Community rules adopted in the environmental sector. In the area of aircraft noise, the Community has adopted a number of directives, the latest being Council Directive 92/14/EEC of 2 March 1992 on the limitation of the operation of aeroplanes convered by Part II, Chapter 2, Volume 1 of Annex 16 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, second edition (1988) (1) which provides that Member States must no longer accept so-called chapter 2 aircraft after 1 April 2002. Existing Community legislation allows Member States to adopt specific operating rules for environmental purposes at Community airports. The Commission is not aware of Italian authorities having adopted such legislation for the Milan airport system. The Commission is, however, analysing the appropriateness of a Community framework for operating rules at airports targeting the environmental impact. It will present the outcome of this assessment in due course. (1) OJ L 76, 23. 3. 1992. (2000/C 225 E/004) WRITTEN QUESTION P-1548/99 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission (1 September 1999) Subject: Articles of precious metals In October 1993 the Commission recognized that it was not possible to achieve mutual recognition of national practices and submitted a proposal for a directive seeking to harmonize Member State legislation on articles of precious metals (COM(93) 322 final) (1). It is now five years since the proposal for a directive was brought forward. C 225 E/4 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 8. 8. 2000 Can the Commission answer the following questions: 1. Are there still technical barriers to the free movement of articles of precious metals within the Union? 2. If so, what is preventing the removal of such obstacles and the attainment of one of primary objectives of the Treaties? 3. Are there any objective responsibilities or specific desiderata that are delaying harmonization in this sphere? 4. If the obstacles have not been removed, what steps will the Commission take to prevent firms that are in favour of harmonization from being penalized by the lack of free movement for articles of precious metals? (1) OJ C 318, 25. 11. 1993, p. 5. Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (19 October 1999) As stated by the Commission in its answers to written questions E-3158/98 by Mr Ferrer (1) and E-3431/98 by Mr Valdivieso de CuØ (2), several activities have already been launched in order to ensure compliance with the principle of the free movement of jewellery. Firstly, as stressed by the Honourable Member there is a proposal for a Council and Parliament directive (3) that is intended, in particular, to harmonise the national laws on pieces of precious metal work in order to guarantee their free movement. The proposal is intended to harmonise degrees of fineness, hallmarks and responsibility marks, together with the certification systems (quality assurance, the EC declaration of conformity and checking by third parties). Under the procedure provided for in Article 251 (former Article 189b) of the EC Treaty, that proposal has already been examined by Parliament on first reading. Conversely, the Council has still not been able to adopt a common position because of the differences of opinion among the Member States with regard to the intended certification procedures. The version currently under discussion within the Council provides for a compromise solution whereby equivalence would be established between only two of the three certification systems, namely between third-party checking and quality assurance, the EC declaration of conformity system being retained on an optional basis. Secondly, while awaiting harmonisation at Community level, the Commission has brought infringement actions against most of the Member States in order to bring the national regulations into line with the judgment (4). The infringement procedures have conclusions of the Court of Justice in its Houtwipperí caused the laws concerned to be amended in most of the Member States. (1) OJ C 207, 21. 7. 1999, p. 33. (2) OJ C 207, 21. 7. 1999, p. 69. (3) OJ C 318, 25. 11. 1993, amended version OJ C 209, 29. 7. 1994. (4) Case 293/93, 15. 9. 1994. (2000/C 225 E/005) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1614/99 by Marianne Thyssen (PPE-DE) to the Commission (15 September 1999) Subject: European standard for PCBs In response to the dioxin crisis, the Belgian government has laid down a standard for testing certain poultry, pigmeat and beef products for human consumption or for use as feed that are intended for export. The standard has been fixed at 200ng/g of fat. The European Standing Veterinary Committee has approved that standard