WRITTEN QUESTION No. 116/99 by Hugh McMAHON Environmental Impact Procedure (85/337/EEC) and infringement proceedings against the UK authorities
12. 11. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/71 Answer by Mr Monti On behalf of the Commission (30 March 1999) The Commission shares the honourable Member’s concern with regard to safeguarding employment. Combating counterfeiting helps to safeguards jobs. Indeed, counterfeiting has adverse economic and social consequences for firms as well as for the economy. The number of jobs lost as a result of counterfeiting is estimated to be at least 100 000 a year for the Community. Innovative and creative firms are the first to be affected by this phenomenon. The reaction of trade mark owners can take a variety of forms. The Commission is not in a position to comment on how effective they are. In order to measure the economic impact of counterfeiting in the internal market, examine legislation in this area and suggest possible solutions that may be implemented to improve the fight against this phenomenon, the Commission on 15 October 1998 adopted a green paper on combating counterfeiting and piracy in the single market (1). The publication of this green paper marked the starting point of a wide-ranging consultation of all those concerned, which has not yet been completed. In connection with this consultation, the Commission and the German Presidency of the Council jointly organised a meeting in Munich on 2-3 March 1999 to hear the views of those concerned. More than 250 participants were able to voice their concern on the matter. As for the initiatives that the Commission might take at the end of this consultation, it is too early at this stage to provide the honourable Member with any precise answer. However, the Commission does not exclude in principle any form of action or favour any method of combating counterfeiting in relation to any other. In view of the great variety of methods mentioned in the green paper, any measures that the Commission might be prompted to take would not necessarily be limited to legislative measures but could also comprise actions for the financial support of activities to combat counterfeiting, organisational or administrative actions or even incentive or facilitation measures. (1) COM(98) 569 final. (1999/C 325/089) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0116/99 by Hugh McMahon (PSE) to the Commission (22 January 1999) Subject: Environmental Impact Procedure (85/337/EEC) and infringement proceedings against the UK authorities Will the Commission specify which infringement procedures have been implemented for breach of Directive 85/337/EEC (1) in the UK since 1994? In particular, can the Commission specify whether Pilmuir Quarry, Newton Mearns, and Sheephill Quarry, Milton, Dunbartonshire (both Scotland) have been included in action taken by the Commission against the United Kingdom authorities? (1) OJ L 175, 5. 7. 1985, p. 40. Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission (25 February 1999) The Commission has opened four infringement proceedings against the United Kingdom under Article 169 EC Treaty with respect to Directive 85/337/EEC. These procedures concerned a development of a dock, a landfill site, the implementation of Article 7 and the scope of the Directive. As regards Pilmuir Quarry, proceedings were opened under Article 169 EC Treaty. However, following the Court of justice judgement in case C-431/92, it was considered that Directive 85/337/EEC did not apply to this project as the application for planning permission was before July 1988. The Commission closed this case in July 1997 and a letter was sent to the Honourable Member informing him of this decision