Você está na página 1de 2

C 45/18 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 10. 2.

98

2. The difficulty facing any legislation to improve the insulation of old buildings is that such an operation is
not worth while unless combined with other objectives. Thus most Member States have introduced legislation
uncer which certain levels of insulation must be included in any major renovation work.

3. Under Directive 93/76/EEC, the thermal insulation requirements laid down by the Member States must take
account of variations in climate.

The Commission is considering what further measures to propose to reduce CO2 emissions as part of our efforts
to combat climate change.

(1) OJ L 237, 22.9.1993.

(98/C 45/21) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1225/97


by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission
(7 April 1997)

Subject: The Cumulative Recovery System

Has the Commission proposal regarding the introduction of a new mechanism for the importation of husked rice
taken into account the profound financial repercussions that such a measure will have on the Community budget?

Has it assessed the financial implications of:


1. the customs revenue lost?
2. the funding needing for the implementation of the measure?
3. the resources used to fund exports, even within the limits laid down by GATT?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission


(3 June 1997)

The analysis of the financial impact of the introduction of the cumulative recovery system (CRS) for husked rice
(Regulation (EC) No 703/97 (1)) requested by the Honourable Member cannot be carried out, because
theoretically, the CRS could result in either a fall or a rise in the import duties collected. The system envisages the
adjustment of the customs duties over- or under-paid on the basis of the balance between what the importer
actually paid at the time of release for free circulation and what he should have paid on the basis of the difference
between the ceiling price on imports and the prices declared by the importer (the ‘consignment-by-consignment
method’).

Since the result of this balance cannot be known in advance, it is impossible to know whether introduction of the
CRS has reduced the amount of the duties collected at the frontier and, indirectly, whether that has increased
imports, which could lead to greater use of intervention and increased financing of subsidized exports.
Consequently, the financial consequences of this system cannot be evaluated before its application.

(1) OJ L 104, 22.4.1997.

(98/C 45/22) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1230/97


by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission
(7 April 1997)

Subject: Transport projects funded by the Cohesion Fund

Project No 94/09/65/020 − a, entitled ‘Egnatia Highway: Section: Kavalla by-pass from Agh. Andreas Junction
to CH.TH. 4 + 937’ was included in the Cohesion Fund in 1995 and was scheduled to be completed by
31.12.1996.
10. 2. 98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 45/19

Will the Commission say:


1. whether the above project has been completed;
2. if not, what stage it has reached (funding, construction work); and
3. if there are delays, what they are due to?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission


(21 May 1997)

Under decision No 94.09.65.020-a, the original deadline for completing the project was 15 October 1996. At the
request of the national authorities, this deadline was postponed to 30 June 1997 because of modification of the
project and adverse weather conditions.

90% of the works have been completed. The remaining work involves asphalting and other tasks concerning
environment, signing and safety.

The Community contribution to the project amounts to 9.1 MECU, of which 70% have been absorbed.

(98/C 45/23) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1241/97


by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission
(8 April 1997)

Subject: Compensatory payments and aid for the production of certified rice seed

The deadline for claiming compensatory payments under Article 6 of Regulation (EEC) No 3072/95 is 30 April
1997 (1). Producers of paddy rice from which seed is obtained (’propagators’) are also entitled, subject to certain
conditions, to benefit from Community aid for the production of certified seed, payable in the year following
production (Regulation (EEC) No 2358/71) (2). It seems that, under the existing legislation, aid may not be
granted from both sources at once, and the reasons are apparently due purely to the legal language in which the
texts are drafted.

1. Does the Commission believe that there are fundamental grounds for refusing to accept that the two kinds
of aid are compatible?

2. Should the incompatibility be finally established, does it not fear that the cost of certified seed would rise
immediately because propagators would have to allow for the risk that they might not receive any aid, be it a
compensatory payment or seed production aid?

3. Does it not fear that certified seed would be less widely used because of the price increase, cutting the profit
margins for the crop and correspondingly reducing the costs incidental to production as well as leading to a
decline in quality, the end effect of which would run blatantly counter to the Community’s policy of promoting
quality, the very basis of the reform?

4. Given the imminence of the deadline, 30 April, does it not believe that it should and indeed must bring
certainty to the matter, so as to avert adverse consequences for the producers and sectors concerned?

(1) OJ L 329, 30.12.1995, p. 18.


(2) OJ L 246, 5.11.1971, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission


(20 May 1997)

The reform of the rice sector introduced in Regulation (EC) No 3072/95 does not affect rice for sowing because
this is not covered by the common organization of the market in rice. There are therefore no plans for the
compensatory payments designed to offset the reduction in the intervention price to be applied to areas sown to
rice for seed.