WRITTEN QUESTION E-1661/99 by Emilia Müller (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Milk quota situation.
C 203 E/16 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 18. 7. 2000 (2000/C 203 E/019) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1650/99 by Hanja Maij-Weggen (PPE-DE) to the Commission Subject: Dutch governmentís assessment of European development aid (22 September 1999) Is the Commission aware of the very critical report on the quality of European aid which has been presented by the Dutch government to the Dutch parliament? Were the Dutch government and the Commission in contact prior to the publication of the report? Does the Commission broadly agree with the criticism made in the report? If so, which specific criticisms does it agree with, and which does it consider irrelevant or inappropriate? What, in general, is the Commissionís response to this report? Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission (18 November 1999) The Commission noted with interest the existence of the Dutch report on the quality of European aid, which was first brought to its attention by the Honourable Memberís written question. Although the Commission did not have any direct contact with the Dutch government on this particular report, there has been a long-standing discussion with Member States on the improvements to be made to European development aid, following four global evaluations that were carried out earlier this year. At its May 1999 meeting, the Development Council adopted a set of conclusions that suggested areas for improvement in the development aid managed by the Commission. These conclusions were the result of a constructive collaboration between the Council and the Commission. The Commission does broadly concur with the content of the report and is pleased to note that the Dutch government recognises the efforts that it is making to improve the management of development aid. It has already recognised that there are certain areas where its performance needs to be improved. Proposals to introduce improvements have either already been presented to the Council and Parliament, or are currently being developed, either within the context of the present regulations and the LomØ Convention, or in the framework of the negotiations that are on-going on the successor Convention to the LomØ Convention and the new regulations for MEDA and South Africa. The Commission is pleased to note that the Dutch government considers that there are grounds for optimism for the future, in terms of constructive co- operation and positive results. The Commission is preparing an action plan of measures to respond to the recommendations of the various evaluation reports, as well as the follow-up proposed in the Council conclusions on evaluation, including a strategic framework for all Community development policy. This action plan will be communicated to the Parliament after its adoption by the Commission. (2000/C 203 E/020) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1661/99 by Emilia Müller (PPE-DE) to the Commission (22 September 1999) Subject: Milk quota situation 1. Do uniform rules regarding milk quotas always apply to all Member States? Is the principle of equal treatment of Member States and of the farmers concerned applied in the case 2. of milk quotas? 3. Do inaccuracies occur in the administration of quotas in many countries? 18. 7. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 203 E/17 4. Is it always the relevant producer himself who has to pay the superlevy if the quota is exceeded? Does the Commission have any information to suggest that Italy has paid LIT 3 631 billion in 5. superlevy from its State budget? 6. If any measures (infringement proceedings) have been taken, what stage have they reached? Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (26 October 1999) Community legislation on milk quotas applies to all the Member States. In a number of respects this 1. legislation permits choices regarding the specific implementing rules so that the Member States can take account of their specific conditions of production. 2. 3. Yes. Yes, but not on a scale which compromises the operation of the arrangement. Yes, but in the case of deliveries collection is the responsibility of the dairy to which the producer 4. delivers. 5. The Commission has collected from Italy the amounts due as a result of the quotas being exceeded. Following the work of ácommissione di garanzia quote latteí (milk quota guarantee commission) which examined the reference quantities of all the producers individually and reported in February 1999, in July the Italian administration undertook to recover those amounts from the debtors. The Commission is awaiting details of this recovery. However, the settlement of any individual disputes is a matter for the Italian courts. 6. An infringement procedure concerning the failure by Italy to make a definitive recovery of the supplementary levy from producers who exceeded their quotas is still in progress. However, in view of the developments referred to in the previous paragraph since a reasoned opinion was issued, the Commission does not consider it necessary to refer the matter to the Court of Justice at this stage. Naturally, it reserves the right to do so if no satisfactory conclusion is reached soon. (2000/C 203 E/021) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1664/99 by Lucio Manisco (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (22 September 1999) Subject: Disputes in France concerning US demands to force the country to accept its beef The French trade union Coordination paysanne europØenne has organised a number of peaceful demon- strations outside the French branches of the US firm Macdonaldís to protest against the US Administra- tionís measures, which heavily tax a number of European products because the Union, quite rightly, refuses to import American beef produced in a way which does not comply with public health requirements in European Union countries. Does the Commission not consider that 1. the symbolic acts by the French trade union ü the distribution of products hit by the US measures, such as Roquefort and foie gras, outside the symbol of the antithesis of European culinary culture ü Macdonaldís ü are worthy of support? 2. What steps does the Commission intend to take to oppose the orders of the WTO ü an organisation under US control ü concerning imports of foodstuffs, in this specific case beef treated with substances harmful to human health?