Înapoi la portalul Europarl

Choisissez la langue de votre document :

  • bg - български
  • es - español
  • cs - čeština
  • da - dansk
  • de - Deutsch
  • et - eesti keel
  • el - ελληνικά
  • en - English (selecţionat)
  • 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
Acest document nu este disponibil în limba dvs. şi vă este propus într-o altă limbă dintre cele disponibile în bara de limbi.

Parliamentary questions
23 January 2012
Question for written answer
to the Commission
Rule 117
Silvana Koch-Mehrin (ALDE)

 Subject: The fuel quality directive and specific default values for tar sands

On 3 October 2011 the Commission adopted a proposal for a Commission directive ‘laying down calculation methods and reporting requirements pursuant to Directive 98/70/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council relating to the quality of petrol and diesel fuels (FQD)’.

In this directive, the Commission introduces a mandatory reduction target of 6 % by 2020 for the life-cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of fuels used in the EU by road vehicles and non-road mobile machinery.

The directive proposes specific default values for fuel produced from tar sands, which differ from those for fuel obtained from conventional mineral oil. The Commission directive will be adopted using the commitology procedure with scrutiny.

While an impact assessment (IA) of the FQD was undertaken in 2007, it did not address the exact methodology which would be applied to reach the reduction targets. Those measures are now decided through the commitology procedure. The current proposal, if implemented, is expected to have a significant impact on the global competitiveness of EU industry. Furthermore, it may raise questions as regards the EU's reliability as a trading partner and increase the administrative obligations of Member States.

Considering the above, will the Commission undertake an impact assessment taking into account the proposed implementing measures? If not, why not?

According to the Commission's impact assessment guidelines (SEC(2009) 0092), an IA should also carefully consider the economic impact of a particular policy option on the EU's trade policy and its international obligations. As the current proposal has significant international relevance, has the Commission given due consideration to its implications for EU trade policy?

Is the Commission aware of the possibility that the Canadian government could start a WTO dispute settlement procedure against the proposal after its adoption? On what grounds does the Commission believe it could win in case of such WTO litigation?

 OJ C 75 E, 14/03/2013
Ultima actualizare: 26 ianuarie 2012Notă juridică