WRITTEN QUESTION E-2433/99 by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Reform of the banana sector with reference to the WTO panel.
8. 8. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 225 E/133 status. In particular, the proposal by the Lazio regional authorities regarding Objective 2 does not appear to reflect adequately the development characteristics of the various areas concerned and therefore does not correspond to the Commissionís guidelines to the Member States in this connection. Can the Commission answer the following: 1. Has it already intervened regarding the definition of eligible areas in Lazio and if so, in what way? 2. Has it expressed itself in favour of the proposal by Lazio regarding the redefinition of Objective status, and in particular of Objective 2? Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission (21 January 2000) Following the Commissionís decision of 1 July 1999 setting, for each Member State, the maximum population eligible for Objective 2 assistance in 2000-2006, the national authorities were invited to send the Commission (at the latest by 31 August 1999) their proposed list of eligible areas within their territory. The Italian authorities sent their proposal on 1 October 1999. On 11 October 1999, the Italian authorities were informed that their proposal was not acceptable as it did not comply with Article 4(4) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 (1) of 21 June 1999, which the areas that satisfy the Communityí criteria laid down in Article 4(5) and (6) must contain at least 50 % of the population eligible for Objective 2 assistance. The Commission therefore called on the Italian authorities to draw up a new proposal in compliance with the Regulation. As soon as it receives the revised Italian proposal, the Commission will evaluate the eligibility of the Italian region of Lazio for Objective 2 assistance. (1) Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds: OJ L 161, 26. 6. 1999. (2000/C 225 E/144) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2433/99 by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (16 December 1999) Subject: Reform of the banana sector with reference to the WTO panel At the Council meeting of Agriculture Ministers on 15 November the Commission put forward a proposal for an amendment to the customs arrangements relating to the banana sector. The purpose of the proposal is to put an end to import quotas and to base the arrangements solely on customs duties with effect from 1 January 2006. This is an attempt to bring the banana regime into line with the WTO rules, in response to the criticisms expressed by the USA and the multinational companies which export from the ádollar bananaí area. Has the Commission carried out any research into the impact which any change in the arrangements would have on Community producers, particularly in view of the fact that there is to be an automatic shift to a scheme based solely on customs duties (which could be reduced as a result of the WTO Millennium Round negotiations)? If such research has been carried out, what were the main findings thereof? If Community producers suffer any losses, what action is the Commission intending to take in order to compensate them and to provide support for the sector and its future? Has the Commission carried out any research into the impact which any change in the arrangements would have on ACP producers, particularly in view of the fact that there is to be an automatic shift to a scheme based solely on customs duties? What action does the Commission intend to propose in terms of cooperation policy and the Community budget in order to compensate ACP producers for their losses? C 225 E/134 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 8. 8. 2000 Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (14 January 2000) The World Trade Organisation (WTO) panel decision did not call into question the Community aid scheme under Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1858/93 of 9 July 1993 laying down detailed rules for applying Council Regulation (EEC) No 404/93 as regards the aid scheme to compensate for loss of income from marketing in the banana sector (1). The Commission considers that support for Community producers is guaranteed by the current system of compensatory aid, under which the amount fixed for each marketing year corresponds to the difference between the flat-rate reference income (which was increased by 5 % in 1998 and up to 8 % from 1999) and the average prices obtained during the year in which the bananas were marketed. Through providing full compensation regardless of price trends on the Community market, the system thus ensures that Community production is sold. The mechanismís effectiveness was confirmed during 1999, when banana prices on the world market slumped and compensatory aid enabled all Community production to be sold and producersí income to be maintained. The Commission takes the view that the compensatory aid scheme will absorb the impact, at production level, of the proposed changes. The financial statement presented with the Commission proposal estimated that its budgetary impact would be to increase expenditure by € 77 million and revenue by € 30 million. The budgetary impact of applying a system based solely on tariffs cannot be quantified at this stage. African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) producers are already covered by Council Regulation (EC) No 856/ 1999 of 22 April 1999 establishing a special framework of assistance for traditional ACP suppliers of bananas (2). The Commission will, in any event, assess whether this support (which has been proposed in the light of the previous changes to the common market organisation) will be sufficient to help traditional ACP suppliers retain their place in the Community market. (1) OJ L 170, 13. 7. 1993. (2) OJ L 108, 27. 4. 1999. (2000/C 225 E/145) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2437/99 by Claude Moraes (PSE) to the Commission (16 December 1999) Subject: Right of establishment in the EU for nationals of Central and Eastern Europe countries (CEECs) for the purposes of business or of providing services as self-employed persons 1. Has the Commission any knowledge of the number of nationals of Central and Eastern European countries (CEECs) who have sought permission to establish themselves in the EU in the last two years in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Agreements between the CEE and the EU? Has the Commission produced any guidance for nationals of Central and Eastern European countries 2. seeking to establish themselves in accordance with these provisions? Has the Commission produced any memoranda or advice notes for the national authorities of the 3. Central and Eastern European countries concerning the right of establishment under these Agreements? Has the Commission received any complaints from nationals of Central and Eastern European 4. countries with regard to the exercise of the right of establishment under these Agreements?