WRITTEN QUESTION E-0590/00 by Giles Chichester (PPE-DE) to the Council. EBRD loans to Russian energy companies.
26. 1. 2001 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 26 E/67 (2001/C 26 E/083) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0586/00 by Mark Watts (PSE) to the Commission (29 February 2000) Subject: European sustainable transport policy Will the Commission indicate how, and to what extent, national transport policy-makers in EU Member States have been influenced by the development of a common European transport policy ü particularly as regards the creation of environmentally sustainable transport systems? Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission (19 April 2000) Most Member States have begun introducing national policies designed to incorporate environmental considerations. The European Council meeting in Cardiff and subsequent European Councils boosted the integration process which must now be sustained and must result in real decisions and the introduction of new instruments to promote, evaluate and oversee the process. Many new measures have been implemented, although in some areas certain Member States are more active than others. A particular example is the link between the reduction in lead emissions and the introduction of tax differentiation for leaded and unleaded petrol. At Community level, the Environment Agency has developed the transport environment reporting mechanism which enables progress in incorporating environmental considerations into the transport sector in Member States to be monitored. Its first report is expected in April 2000. In the context of trans-European network policy, Article 8 of Parliament and Council Decision 1692/96/EC of 23 July 1996 on Community guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network (1) reinforces the Member Statesí commitment to make environmental impact assessments when they develop and carry out projects of common interest, in line with Council Directive 85/337/EC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (2) and Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (3). Moreover, in accordance with Article 18 of the above-mentioned Decision, Member States are obliged to regularly notify the Commission of the national plans and programmes which they have drawn up for the development of the trans-European transport network, in particular for projects of common interest. As regards environmentally sustainable transport systems in cities, and mindful of the principle of subsidiarity, the Commission has focused its efforts on exchanging good practices. In particular, it has contributed by financing ELTIS (European Local Transport Information Service), which is a database of information about local and regional passenger transport, available to elected representatives, politicians, transport operators and managers and, of course, transport users. This database features many case studies and a forum open to the public. Lastly, the database of good practices in the field of urban planning and sustainable development contains good examples of sustainable development. (1) OJ L 228, 9. 9. 1996. (2) OJ L 175, 5. 7. 1985. (3) OJ L 206, 22. 7. 1992. (2001/C 26 E/084) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0590/00 by Giles Chichester (PPE-DE) to the Council (2 March 2000) Subject: EBRD loans to Russian energy companies Can the Council say whether it has any plans to review the operation of the EBRDís Agreement and Guidelines for lending to Russian energy companies? C 26 E/68 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 26. 1. 2001 Reply (26 June 2000) The Council has, as such, no competence to review the operation of the Agreement and Guidelines for lending of the EBRD, which institution was created by an international agreement concluded between, at the time, 39 European and non European countries, such as the USA and Japan on the one hand and the EU and the EIB on the other hand. (2001/C 26 E/085) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0602/00 by Giovanni Pittella (PSE) to the Commission Subject: Outbreak of avian influenza in some parts of Italy (3 March 2000) In connection with the avian flu epidemic currently affecting some parts of Italy, which has led to the death or slaughter of seven million birds. Can the Commission state: ü what methods were used for the slaughter of the birds that did not die as a direct cause of the epidemic, who they were slaughtered by, on whose authorisation and at which sites and how many birds have been slaughtered; ü whether and in what way the provisions of Directive 93/119/EC (1) (transposed by means of Legislative Decree No 333 of 1 September 1998) have been complied with; ü what method has been chosen for the disposal of the birds slaughtered as a result of the epidemic? (1) OJ L 340, 31. 12. 1993, p. 21. Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission (14 April 2000) By mid March 2000 the Italian authorities had reported 368 outbreaks of avian influenza. The outbreaks have occurred in different kinds of species and production types. About 12,2 million birds have been killed at infected poultry farms and 3 million at farms considered as contact farms or as being high risk farms. Exact data for birds that died because of the disease and those which have definitively been killed in the affected farms are not yet available. One reason for the missing figures is that the disease can cause mortality that can reach up to 100 % in a very short period of time. Animals often die while arrangements for their destruction are being made. The method of killing birds was discussed at the meeting of the standing veterinary committee in January and again in March 2000. At the later meeting the Italian delegation announced that the provisions of Council Directive 93/119/EEC on the protection of animals at the time of slaughter or killing (1) were being applied. This Directive (Annex C) lists the permitted methods of killing poultry as electrocution, exposure to carbon dioxide, decapitation, dislocation of the neck and the use of a vacuum chamber. During execution specific requirements must be fulfilled within the framework of the overall objective (Article 3) of this Directive; thus to spare animals áany avoidable excitement, pain or suffering during movement, lairaging, restraint, stunning, slaughter or killingí. In addition to the killing methods referred to above the competent authority may apply other killing methods for disease control during epidemics (Annex E). In such situations the methods applied must be in compliance with the general provisions of