(1)

The European Union is a Party to the Cooperation Agreement for the Protection of the Coasts and Waters of the North-East Atlantic against Pollution approved by Council Decision 93/550/EEC (2) (hereinafter referred to as the Lisbon Agreement).

(2)

A political dispute over the borders in Western Sahara prevented Spain and Morocco from ratifying the Lisbon Agreement. This dispute has now been resolved by the Additional Protocol to the Lisbon Agreement modifying Article 3(c) thereof.

(3)

Following the adoption of the Council Decision on the signing, on behalf of the European Community, of the Additional Protocol to the Cooperation Agreement for the Protection of the Coasts and Waters of the North-East Atlantic against Pollution on 12 December 2008, the Additional Protocol was signed, on behalf of the Community, on 25 March 2009.

(4)

The Additional Protocol to the Lisbon Agreement is open to ratification, acceptance or approval by the Parties.

(5)

It is therefore appropriate for the Union to conclude the Additional Protocol to the Lisbon Agreement.

(6)

The European Union and Member States Parties to the Lisbon Agreement should endeavour to deposit simultaneously, to the extent possible, their instruments of ratification, acceptance or approval of the Additional Protocol.

(7)

Following the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon on 1 December 2009, the European Union notified the Government of Portugal as regards the European Union having replaced and succeeded the European Community,

(1)

In August and December 2007 the regional authorities of the Azores and Madeira requested, with the support of the Portuguese Government, an autonomous suspension of the Common Customs Tariff duties for a number of products in accordance with Article 299(2) of the Treaty establishing the European Community. They justified their requests on the grounds that, in view of the remoteness of those islands, economic operators in the Azores and Madeira are at a severe commercial disadvantage, which has negative effects on demographic trends, employment and social and economic developments.

(2)

The local economies of the Azores and Madeira are to a large extent dependant on national and international tourism, a fairly volatile economic resource, which is determined by factors on which the local authorities and the Portuguese Government have hardly any influence. As a result, the economic development of the Azores and Madeira is severely restrained. In these circumstances it is necessary to support those economic sectors which are less dependent on the tourist industries in order to compensate the fluctuations of the tourist sector and thus to stabilise local employment.

(3)

Council Regulation (EEC) No 1657/93 of 24 June 1993 temporarily suspending the autonomous Common Customs Tariff duties on certain industrial products intended to equip the free zones of the Azores and Madeira (3) did not have the desired effect in the last years before its expiry on 31 December 2008. This is in all likelihood due to the fact that the suspensions laid down in that Regulation were limited to the free zones of the Azores and Madeira and were therefore no longer used in the last years before their expiry. It is therefore appropriate to provide for new suspensions which are not restricted to industries located in free zones but can benefit to all types of economic operators located on the territory of those regions. The scope of commercial sectors benefiting from the suspensions should therefore cover the fishery, agricultural, industrial and service sectors.

(4)

In order to ensure that the suspensions laid down in this Regulation have an economic impact, it is appropriate to extend the range of products benefiting from the suspensions to finished goods for agricultural, commercial or industrial use, as well as to raw materials, parts and components used for agricultural purposes, industrial transformation or maintenance.

(5)

In order to give a long-term perspective to investors and enable economic operators to reach a level of industrial and commercial activity which stabilises the economic and social environment in the regions concerned, it is appropriate to suspend in full the Common Customs Tariff duties for certain goods for a period of 10 years as from 1 November 2010.

(6)

In order to ensure that only economic operators located on the territory of the Azores and Madeira benefit from these tariff measures, the suspensions should be made conditional on the end use of the products in accordance with Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code (4) and Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/93 establishing the Community Customs Code (5).

(7)

In order to allow efficient operation of the suspensions, the authorities of the Azores and Madeira should take the necessary implementing measures and inform the Commission thereof.

(8)

The Commission should be permitted to adopt, if necessary, temporary measures designed to prevent any speculative movement of deflection of trade until a definitive solution for that movement will be adopted by the Council.

(9)

Amendments to the Combined Nomenclature may not give rise to any substantive changes to the nature of the suspension of duties. The Commission should therefore be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union for the purpose of making necessary amendments and technical adaptations to the list of goods for which a suspension applies,

(1)

Article 4(1)(a) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 884/2006 of 21 June 2006 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 as regards the financing by the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) of intervention measures in the form of public storage operations and the accounting of public storage operations by the paying agencies of the Member States (2) provides that expenditure relating to the financial costs incurred by Member States in mobilising funds to buy in products is to be determined in accordance with the methods set out in Annex IV to that Regulation.

(2)

The first paragraph of point I.1 of Annex IV to Regulation (EC) No 884/2006 provides that the financial costs in question are to be calculated on the basis of a uniform interest rate for the Union fixed by the Commission at the beginning of every accounting year. That interest rate corresponds to the average of the 3-month and 12-month forward Euribor rates, recorded in the 6 months preceding the notification from the Member States provided for in the first paragraph of point I.1 of the aforementioned Annex IV, with a weighting of one third and two thirds respectively. That rate must be fixed at the beginning of each accounting year of the EAGF.

(3)

However, if the interest rate notified by a Member State is lower than the uniform interest rate fixed for the Union, in accordance with the second paragraph of point I.2 of Annex IV to Regulation (EC) No 884/2006, the interest rate is to be fixed at the level of the rate notified.

(4)

Furthermore, in accordance with the third paragraph of point I.2 of Annex IV to Regulation (EC) No 884/2006, in the absence of any notification from a Member State, in the form and by the deadline referred to in the first paragraph of point I.2 of the aforementioned Annex IV, the interest rate borne by that Member State is to be considered as being 0 %. In the situation where a Member State declares that it did not bear any interest costs because it did not have agricultural products in public storage during the reference period, the uniform interest rate fixed by the Commission applies to that Member State. Luxembourg, Malta and Portugal have declared that they did not bear any interest costs as they did not have any agricultural products in public storage during the reference period.

(5)

Given the Member States’ notifications to the Commission, the interest rates applicable for the 2011 EAGF accounting year should be fixed taking the various factors into account.

(6)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee on the Agricultural Funds,

(a)

0,0 % in the case of the specific interest rate applicable in Cyprus, Estonia and Latvia;

(b)

0,2 % in the case of the specific interest rate applicable in Bulgaria;

(c)

0,3 % in the case of the specific interest rate applicable in Sweden;

(d)

0,4 % in the case of the specific interest rate applicable in Germany, Ireland and Finland;

(e)

0,5 % in the case of the specific interest rate applicable in Austria and the United Kingdom;

(f)

0,6 % in the case of the specific interest rate applicable in Italy;

(g)

0,7 % in the case of the specific interest rate applicable in Greece;

(h)

1,0 % in the case of the specific interest rate applicable in Belgium;

(i)

1,1 % in the case of the uniform interest rate for the Union applicable to the other Member States.

(1)

Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 6(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, Poland’s application to register the name ‘Śliwka szydłowska’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).

(2)

As no statement of objection under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 has been received by the Commission, that name should be entered in the register,

(1)

Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 6(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, Germany’s application to register the name ‘Hessischer Apfelwein’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).

(2)

As no statement of objection pursuant to Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 has been received by the Commission, that name should be entered in the register,

(1)

Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 6(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, Poland’s application to register the name ‘Obwarzanek krakowski’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).

(2)

As no statement of objection under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 has been received by the Commission, that name should therefore be entered in the register,

(1)

(2)

As no statement of objection under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 has been received by the Commission, that name should therefore be entered in the register,

(1)

Pursuant to the first subparagraph of Article 6(2) of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006, France’s application to register the name ‘Porc de Franche-Comté’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).

(2)

As no statement of objection under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 has been received by the Commission, that name should be entered in the register,

(1)

Council Regulation (EU) No 53/2010 of 14 January 2010 fixing for 2010 the fishing opportunities for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, applicable in EU waters and, for EU vessels, in waters where catch limitations are required (2), lays down quotas for 2010.

(2)

According to the information received by the Commission, catches of the stock referred to in the Annex to this Regulation by vessels flying the flag of or registered in the Member State referred to therein have exhausted the quota allocated for 2010.

(3)

It is therefore necessary to prohibit fishing activities for that stock,

(1)

Article 136(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 states that the import duty on products falling within CN codes 1001 10 00, 1001 90 91, ex 1001 90 99 (high quality common wheat), 1002, ex 1005 other than hybrid seed, and ex 1007 other than hybrids for sowing, is to be equal to the intervention price valid for such products on importation increased by 55 %, minus the cif import price applicable to the consignment in question. However, that duty may not exceed the rate of duty in the Common Customs Tariff.

(2)

Article 136(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 lays down that, for the purposes of calculating the import duty referred to in paragraph 1 of that Article, representative cif import prices are to be established on a regular basis for the products in question.

(3)

Under Article 2(2) of Regulation (EU) No 642/2010, the price to be used for the calculation of the import duty on products of CN codes 1001 10 00, 1001 90 91, ex 1001 90 99 (high quality common wheat), 1002 00, 1005 10 90, 1005 90 00 and 1007 00 90 is the daily cif representative import price determined as specified in Article 5 of that Regulation.

(4)

Import duties should be fixed for the period from 1 November 2010 and should apply until new import duties are fixed and enter into force,

(1)

On 13 December 2004, the Council adopted Common Position 2004/852/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Côte d’Ivoire (1) in order to implement the measures imposed against Côte d’Ivoire by United Nations Security Council Resolution (hereinafter ‘UNSCR’) 1572 (2004).

(2)

On 23 January 2006, the Council adopted Common Position 2006/30/CFSP (2) renewing the restrictive measures imposed against Côte d’Ivoire for a further period of 12 months and supplementing them with the restrictive measures imposed by point 6 of UNSCR 1643 (2005).

(3)

Following the renewal of the restrictive measures against Côte d’Ivoire by UNSCR 1842 (2008), on 18 November 2008, the Council adopted Common Position 2008/873/CFSP (3) further renewing the restrictive measures imposed against Côte d’Ivoire, with effect from 1 November 2008.

(4)

On 15 October 2010, the United Nations Security Council adopted UNSCR 1946 (2010) which renewed the measures imposed against Côte d’Ivoire by UNSCR 1572 (2004) and point 6 of UNSCR 1643 (2005) until 30 April 2011 and which amended the restrictive measures on arms.

(5)

The restrictive measures imposed against Côte d’Ivoire should therefore be renewed. In addition to the exemptions to the arms embargo provided for in UNSCR 1946 (2010), it is appropriate to amend the restrictive measures in order to exempt other equipment included autonomously by the Union.

(6)

Union implementing measures are set out in Council Regulation (EC) No 174/2005 of 31 January 2005 imposing restrictions on the supply of assistance related to military activities to Côte d’Ivoire (4), Council Regulation (EC) No 560/2005 of 12 April 2005 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Côte d’Ivoire (5) and Council Regulation (EC) No 2368/2002 of 20 December 2002 implementing the Kimberley Process certification scheme for the international trade in rough diamonds (6),

(a)

supplies and technical assistance intended solely for the support of or use by the United Nations Operation in Côte d’Ivoire and the French forces who support them;

(b)

the following, as approved in advance by the Committee established by paragraph 14 of UNSCR 1572 (2004) (hereinafter the ‘Sanctions Committee’):

(c)

the sale, supply, transfer or export of protective clothing, including flak jackets and military helmets, temporarily exported to Côte d’Ivoire by United Nations personnel, personnel of the Union or its Member States, representatives of the media and humanitarian and development workers and associated personnel for their personal use only;

(d)

sales or supplies temporarily transferred or exported to Côte d’Ivoire to the forces of a state which is taking action, in accordance with international law, solely and directly to facilitate the evacuation of its nationals and those for whom it has consular responsibility in Côte d’Ivoire, as notified in advance to the Sanctions Committee;

(e)

the sale, supply, transfer or export of arms and related material and technical training and assistance intended solely for the support of, or use in, the process of restructuring defence and security forces pursuant to paragraph 3, subparagraph (f) of the Linas-Marcoussis Agreement, as approved in advance by the Sanctions Committee;

(f)

the sale, supply, transfer or export of non-lethal equipment capable of being used for internal repression and which is intended solely to enable the security forces of Côte d’Ivoire to use only appropriate and proportionate force while maintaining public order, as well as the provision of financing, financial assistance or technical assistance and training related to such equipment.

(1)

Decision 2009/470/EC provides that where a Member State is directly threatened by the occurrence or the development, in the territory of a third country or Member State, of one of the diseases listed in Annex I to that Decision, it may be decided to adopt measures appropriate to the situation and to grant a Union financial contribution towards the measures deemed particularly necessary for the success of the actions undertaken.

(2)

Rabies is an animal disease that mainly affects wild and domestic carnivores and has serious public health implications. It is one of the diseases listed in Annex I to Decision 2009/470/EC.

(3)

In recent years, the Union has co-financed programmes for the oral immunisation of wild carnivores, which are the reservoir of that disease, and they have resulted in a favourable situation in most Member States with a drastic reduction in the number of cases of rabies in wild and domestic animals and the disappearance of human cases.

(4)

Italy has been considered a rabies free country since 1997. However, in October 2008 in the region of Friuli Venezia Giulia, one case of rabies was detected, followed by eight new cases in the same region. In 2009, the sylvatic rabies spread also to the Veneto region. By the end of 2009, 35 cases were detected in Friuli Venezia Giulia and 33 cases in Veneto.

(5)

Neighbouring Member States have expressed concern that their territories are threatened by the rabies situation in north-east Italy.

(6)

Accordingly, emergency measures are necessary to prevent the further spread of the disease in Italy, as well as the spread to the neighbouring Member States of Austria and Slovenia, and to reinforce the efforts to eradicate the disease as soon as possible.

(7)

On 9 December 2009, Italy submitted to the Commission an emergency plan for the oral vaccination of foxes, ‘Rabies control programme in the regions of north-east Italy – Special vaccination plan for foxes’. The plan was found to be acceptable and it is therefore appropriate that certain measures receive Union financing. A Union financial contribution should therefore be granted for its implementation.

(8)

The Union financial contribution should be paid on the basis of the official request for reimbursement submitted by Member States and supporting documents referred to in Article 7 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 349/2005 of 28 February 2005 laying down rules on the Community financing of emergency measures and of the campaign to combat certain animal diseases under Council Decision 90/424/EEC. (2)

(9)

Taking into account the urgency to implement the extended vaccination plan in order to prevent spread to other Member States it is justified that Union financial contribution is made available from 9 December 2009 when the plan was submitted to the Commission for financing.

(10)

The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health,

(1)

The adoption of the euro by Estonia on 1 January 2011 means that credit institutions and branches of credit institutions located in Estonia will be subject to reserve requirements from that date.

(2)

The integration of these entities into the minimum reserve system of the Eurosystem requires the adoption of transitional provisions in order to ensure smooth integration without creating a disproportionate burden for credit institutions in Member States whose currency is the euro, including Estonia.

(3)

Article 5 of the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank implies that the ECB, assisted by the national central banks, collects the necessary statistical information from the competent national authorities or directly from economic agents also to ensure timely preparation in the field of statistics in view of the adoption of the euro by a Member State,