Go back to the Europarl portal

Choisissez la langue de votre document :

  • bg - български
  • es - español
  • cs - čeština
  • da - dansk
  • de - Deutsch
  • et - eesti keel
  • el - ελληνικά
  • en - English (Selected)
  • fr - français
  • ga - Gaeilge
  • hr - hrvatski
  • it - italiano
  • lv - latviešu valoda
  • lt - lietuvių kalba
  • hu - magyar
  • mt - Malti
  • nl - Nederlands
  • pl - polski
  • pt - português
  • ro - română
  • sk - slovenčina
  • sl - slovenščina
  • fi - suomi
  • sv - svenska
Parliamentary questions
PDF 103kWORD 18k
14 July 2017
Question for written answer E-004859-17
to the Commission
Rule 130
Claude Turmes (Verts/ALE) , Michèle Rivasi (Verts/ALE) , Rebecca Harms (Verts/ALE)

 Subject:  Amending Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/6
 Answer in writing 

The Commission’s proposal for Regulation (EU) 2016/6 modifies Annex II, which lists feed and food for which sampling and analysis regarding the presence of caesium-134 and caesium 137 are required before export to the Union. According to the proposal, the modifications in question are based on occurrence data provided by the Japanese authorities for 2014, 2015 and 2016. However, neither these particular data, nor any other related analysis, are published with the proposal.

In this context, can the Commission provide:
1. The Japanese occurrence data and supporting documents, as well as any other calculations or analysis performed on them by the Commission in the process of drafting its proposal?
2. Justifications, in reference to the occurrence data, for each modification outlined in the proposal — namely why it is considered safe/necessary to remove/add the different feed and food listed in Annex II, in relation to each individual prefecture?
3. A definition of the term ‘low frequency’ in relation to the import controls referred to in Recital 12 of its proposal?
Legal notice