You are on page 1of 2

11. 3.

98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 76/77

Two further exceptions to the general exemption of shipments of waste listed in Annex II and destined for
recovery from the Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 are:
− the introduction of Annex II which says that ‘regardless of whether or not wastes are included on this list,
they may not be moved as green wastes if they are contaminated by other materials to an extent which (a)
increases the risks associated with the waste sufficiently to render it appropriate for inclusion in the amber or
red lists, or (b) prevents the recovery of the waste in an environmentally sound manner’;
− the procedure designed for the shipment of waste from the amber or red list may also be applied to the
shipment of green list waste to countries which do not belong to the Organization for economic cooperation
and development (OECD) if the countries of import wish to have those procedures applied.

The application of the procedure for the shipment of waste of the amber list destined for recovery implies the
necessity of prior notification to the authorities as well as an authorization from these authorities. This
authorization may be given by implication. Under the red list procedure the authorization has to be given
explicitly.

In any case authorities may impose restrictions on import, transit and export for those wastes which are destined
for final disposal. This applies to all wastes regardless of their classification.

1. b) Generally, these rules do not prevent recycling where large quantities are involved. The shipment of
these wastes may be impeded in those cases where electrical or electronic appliances are contaminated. The
choice of the control procedure and possible restrictions to the shipment depends on the authorities of non-OECD
countries when wastes are shipped to these countries.

2. a) At present recycling of plastics is not very developed. One reason is that there is still not sufficient
material to ensure a steady supply for continued production.

2. b) The Commission is currently examining possibilities for the recycling of plastics.

(1) OJ L 30, 6.2.1993.


(2) OJ L 194, 25.7.1975.

(98/C 76/165) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2106/97


by Gérard Caudron (PSE) to the Commission
(23 June 1997)

Subject: Action plan for textiles

After a great deal of hesitation, the new French plan for the textile industry appears to have secured the backing
of the Commission.

However, industrialists and workers in the sector remain concerned about its implementation.

There are many who believe that, if it can adjust to current market conditions, the textile industry could be a key
sector of European industry.

It is widely appreciated, however, that special measures are needed to deal with the current conditions of
competition, which are sometimes unfair and unjust.

Will the Commission say what its intentions are in this field and report on the many consultations it held on this
subject in 1996?

Will it also say what special plans it has for the textile industry as part of a wider industrial strategy?
C 76/78 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 11. 3. 98

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission


(4 September 1997)

On 9 April 1997 the Commission adopted a final decision (1) rejecting the experimental measures introduced by
France to reduce social security costs in the textile, clothing, leather and footwear sector.

The Commission considered that the costs arising from agreements between the two sides of any given industry
should be borne by the undertakings themselves. It therefore concluded that this measure is, by nature, fully State
aid.

The sectoral nature of the aid made it impossible for the Commission to grant the derogations provided for in the
guidelines on aid to employment (2).

In response to this decision, the French authorities have announced that they intend to submit a new cost-relief
plan to the Commission.

The Commission shares the Honourable Member's view that textiles could remain a key sector of European
industry. To this end, the Commission is ensuring strict compliance with the World Trade Organisation (WTO)
rules and discipline on international competition and will continue to apply the instruments at its disposal in
compliance with its international commitments.

In this context, in 1996 the Commission submitted two communications to the Council and Parliament − one on
the impact of international developments on the Community's textile and clothing sector (3), which was
examined at the March 1996 Council meeting on industry, the other on the competitiveness of subcontracting in
the textile and clothing industry (4), which was examined by the Council in November 1996.

In addition, working parties made up of representatives of both sides of the industry, the Member States and the
Commission examined all the problems facing this sector over the last few months of 1996 and at the start of
1997. Based on a report by both sides of the industry, the Commission is preparing an assessment of this
approach and the conclusions which it feels should be drawn.

The industrial strategy for the textile and clothing sector fits in with the Commission's industrial policy
guidelines set out in a series of recent communications (5). These guidelines lay down a general framework,
taking account of the specific features of each sector. The objectives of guaranteeing an environment conducive
to industrial activity and of developing and reinforcing the competitive advantages of the European Union's
textile and clothing industry ensure the consistency of the initiatives taken by the Commission.

(1) COM(97) 1162 final.


(2) OJ C 334, 12.12.1995.
(3) COM(95) 447 final.
(4) COM(96) 210 final.
(5) ‘Industrial policy in an open and competitive environment − guidelines for a Community approach’ (COM(90) 556 final); ‘An industrial
competitiveness policy for the European Union’ (COM(94) 319 final); ‘Benchmarking the competitiveness of European industry’
(COM(96) 463 final).

(98/C 76/166) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2111/97


by Josep Pons Grau (PSE) to the Commission
(23 June 1997)

Subject: Interim evaluation of the PHARE, TACIS and MEDA programmes

In approving the 1998 budget guidelines on 13 March 1997 in Strasbourg, Parliament recalled its decision
(adopted in its resolution of 26 October 1995) concerning an evaluation of the three most important programmes
(i.e. PHARE, TACIS and MEDA), to be carried out towards the middle of their period of application (i.e. around
30 June 1997), so as to enable decisions to be taken regarding future appropriations (1).

In the light of Parliament’s criticisms and the disappointing results achieved so far (in the PHARE and TACIS
programme budgets there is over ECU 3 billion worth of commitment appropriations awaiting contracts and
there have been substantial delays in the implementation of contracts, to the detriment of other category 4 budget
headings which are operating smoothly and effectively), and since the 1998 budgetary procedure has already
begun (the 1998 preliminary draft has been approved by the Commission and is scheduled for first reading by the
Council in July), could the Commission say what progress has been made in the interim evaluation of the three
programmes?