91999E0193

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0193/99

by Robert Evans (PSE) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Grey whales in Mexico

The European Union is currently conducting negotiations with the Government of Mexico for a wide-ranging and ambitious economic association and political cooperation agreement. The preamble to the draft Proposal for a Council Decision (COM(97) 527 final)(1) refers to the importance both parties attach to the application of sustainable development principles, as set out in Agenda 21 of the 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development. Furthermore, in Article 34 of the proposal under negotiation, the parties commit themselves to preserve the environment and ecological balance of their respective jurisdictions. Since the proposed Mexico-EU Free-Trade Agreement contains as yet no environmental "side agreement" - a level of protection found in the North American Free-Trade Agreement (NAFTA) - there is a concern that Mexican environmental laws and regulations will not be fully enforced and implemented and that this will lead to an unfair trade advantage between the EU and Mexico.

Is the Commission aware of the fact that a project proposed by the Mexican Government and the Mitsubishi Corporation of Japan to construct an industrial salt-producing complex in Baja California, within a pristine lagoon, the Laguna San Ignacio, where grey whales reproduce and which was designated as a whale sanctuary by Mexico in 1976 and further protected by Mexican Presidential Decree in 1988 (as part of the Vizcaino Biosphere Reserve) and given international protection when the site was declared a UN World Heritage Site in 1993 by the 159-member Convention, is therefore in direct contradiction with the letter and spirit of the draft agreement, and, more specifically, with Articles 29 and 34 thereof?

In accordance with the regular dialogue and information exchange referred to in Article 13 of the draft agreement, is the Commission prepared to discuss the Laguna San Ignacio saltworks development by the ESSA company, the threat to the grey whales and other fauna and flora, including the highly endangered prong-horned antelope, as well as the unacceptability of the establishment of a huge industrial development within a World Heritage Site and to ask the Mexican Government to abandon this salt-evaporation plant?

For the time being, in the event that the Mexican Government allows ESSA to continue with these saltworks, is the Commission prepared to consider, in accordance with Article 5(k) of the draft agreement, to make an exception for the import of salt from Mexico into the EU so as to help prevent the establishment of this salt-evaporation plant?

For the time being, in the event that the Mexican Government allows ESSA to continue with these saltworks, is the Commission prepared to consider raising the question with the Member States of the EU which are members of the World Heritage Convention and ask them to propose to the General Assembly of the WHC to put the El Vizcaino MAB/UNESCO Biosphere Reserve (which includes the Laguna San Ignacio) on the World Heritage in Danger list?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission

(8 April 1999)

The Commission thanks the Honourable Member for his question and the interest he takes in the plight of the San Ignacio Lagoon. The Commission is aware of the proposed project to construct a solar evaporation salt plant in this area.

The Honourable Member cites a number of important environmental provisions in the Economic partnership, political co-ordination and co-operation agreement signed by the Community and its Member States and Mexico in December 1997. Although the agreement has already been ratified by a number of Member States, in order for it and its legal provisions to enter into force, the remaining Member States, the Parliament (where work has begun on this process) and Mexico must complete the requisite procedures. Notwithstanding this situation, the Commission will certainly communicate the concerns raised by the Parliament to Mexico in the appropriate context in order that it be aware of the strength of feeling aroused by this issue.

Regarding the suggestion raised by the Honourable Member to make an exception for imports of Mexican salt from a future free trade agreement, given that the Community already provides duty-free access for such salt (CN code 25010000) from Mexico under its multilateral commitment at the World trade organisation (WTO) to grant duty-free access on a most favoured nation (MFN) basis, the question of an exception in a bilateral context would not apply to the extent that there would be no tariff to further dismantle.

Moreover, to date the Community has coherently argued against the recourse to unilateral trade action in pursuance of environmental and conservation objectives for two reasons. Firstly, such action has been shown to be highly ineffective to address such concerns. Secondly, given that WTO rules do not allow members to restrict imports on the basis of the processes and production methods (PPMs) of products, the Community would risk falling foul of its obligations as a WTO member by undertaking such a measure on such grounds.

The Honourable Member's suggestion regarding raising the issue in the World heritage convention context could be considered in the context of the Community's broader stance in favour of multilaterally agreed action.

(1) OJ C 350, 19.11.1997, p. 6.