WRITTEN QUESTION E-1793/99 by Ria Oomen-Ruijten (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Ban on antifouling paints containing copper.
8. 8. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 225 E/21 This Commission intention has been confirmed in the Commission communication on áthe common transport policy ü sustainable mobility: perspectives for the futureí, which mentions a proposal on accident the main possible tasks for its action programme 2000-2004 (4). investigation and statistics as one of IMO Assembly Resolution A. 849(20) adopted on 27 November 1997. (1) OJ L 138, 1. 6. 1999. (2) (3) OJ C 108, 7. 4. 1998. (4) COM(98) 716 final. (2000/C 225 E/022) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1793/99 by Ria Oomen-Ruijten (PPE-DE) to the Commission Subject: Ban on antifouling paints containing copper (11 October 1999) On 31 August 1999, the Netherlands Minister for Health, Welfare and Sport (for the Pesticides Authorisa- tion Board) issued a decree prohibiting, with effect from 1 September 1999, the use on (i. e. application to) pleasure craft in the Netherlands of antifouling paints that contain copper. However, vessels to which antifouling paints containing copper are applied in other countries are not banned in Dutch waters. Nor does the ban apply to antifouling treatments used in the Netherlands before 1 September 1999. Does the Commission agree that the Dutch provisions may be regarded as a barrier to trade such as is prohibited by Article 30 of the EC Treaty? Does the Netherlands government have the power to issue such a decree before the end of implementation period of, in this case, Directive 98/8/EC (1) (the Biocides Directive)? the What are the Netherlands governmentís obligations pursuant to Directive 98/8/EC and/or the general directive on the notification of technical measures (Directive 98/34/EC) (2) as regards the notification of this ban before it is implemented? Has the Netherlands fulfilled any such obligations? If so, how and to what extent? If not, what action does the Commission plan to take? (1) OJ L 123, 24. 4. 1998, p. 1. (2) OJ L 204, 21. 7. 1998, p. 37. Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission (17 December 1999) The Commission is unable to state its opinion on the national provisions until they have been notified to it. If the national provisions concerned are átechnical rulesí within the meaning of Directive 98/34/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 22 June 1998 laying down the procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations, the Netherlands has not fulfilled its obligations since, as far as the Commission is aware, the provisions concerned have not been notified to it. If the provisions are indeed átechnical rulesí which have not been notified in accordance with the procedure laid down in the above Directive, the Commission, as guardian of the EC Treaty, will take all necessary steps. However, a more detailed examination of the measure is necessary to enable the Commission to adopt a position on it. C 225 E/22 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 8. 8. 2000 Article 16 of Directive 98/8/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 1998 concerning the placing on the market of biocide products provides for a transitional period of ten years. During the transitional period, the notification requirement under Directive 98/34/EC still remains (see Article 16(5)). Until the final date for the transposition of the Biocides Directive, on 13 May 2000, the Dutch authorities do have the right to adopt such national provisions, provided that, apart from being notified as mentioned above, the provisions are compatible with Articles 28 (formerly Article 30) to 30 (formerly Article 36) of the EC Treaty. The Commission will check such compatibility on the basis of the texts submitted to it. (2000/C 225 E/023) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1808/99 by Paul Rübig (PPE-DE) to the Commission (12 October 1999) Subject: Notified bodies The Commissionís intention to promote free trade between the EU and the countries applying for membership and to reduce industryís costs by means of the speedy recognition of notified bodies is supported by the author of this question. There must, however, be no permanent lowering of environ- mental, social, product and technical standards which may affect consumers either in the EU or in the applicant countries. For this reason it must be ensured that notified bodies in the applicant countries receive professional and financial assistance to enable them to monitor the release of products on to the market, so that the EUís quality standards can be matched. In general terms, however, precautions should also be taken to ensure that the quality standards of technical monitoring in the EU and in the applicant countries are such that consumers are guaranteed a high level of protection and safety. There is no room for any áblack sheepí amongst the ranks of such important institutions as the notified bodies. 1. Why was the question of notified bodies not negotiated as part of the whole accession ápackageí? 2. What action is the Commission planning to take in order to bring the notified bodies in the applicant countries up to the EUís quality standards, and will that action be sufficient? 3. What have the Commissionís experiences with the protection clause procedures been so far and what form will such procedures take during the transition period? 4. What form does the question of jurisdiction take? How does the Commission intend to carry out regular monitoring of the necessary quality standards 5. both in the EU and in the applicant countries? 6. Is the Commission planning to take any further steps in order to promote liberalisation in the field of testing and standards and thereby to reduce costs borne by producers and hence, indirectly, by consumers? Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission (3 December 1999) The Commission is in broad agreement with the position expressed by the Honourable Member. However, it would add the following comments in reply to the specific questions: 1. Questions relating to notified bodies are covered by the enlargement negotiations, under the chapter áfree movement of goodsí. These negotiations are still in process