Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the report which I have the opportunity to propose to you today is an opinion on the Commission’s Annual Report on the state aid in force within the European Union and for which the Community is authorised under Articles 87, 88 and 89 of the Treaties. The Commission report is essentially a descriptive report detailing the development of state aid in the manufacturing sector and certain other sectors, according to various typologies, such as the method of financing and the objectives pursued. Let me refer you to the explanatory statement for the quantitative aspects of the report and simply mention at this point that the annual level of state aid, on average, for the period under review, is in the order of EUR 95 billion, corresponding to a reduction in the order of 13 % in relation to the period 1993-1995, a reduction which is essentially due to a reduction in aid in the Federal Republic of Germany. To put it plainly, the level of state aid declared, roughly speaking, is generally stable during the period under discussion and comes to approximately 1.2% of Community GDP or more or less the equivalent, coincidentally, of the Community budget for one year. This being the case, there are considerable disparities between states, which may be measured in various ways, such as, for example, as a percentage of added value and per wage earner. I think it is also interesting to add state aid and Community aid, which may be assimilated in some way into state aid. This clearly shows that it is the four countries which benefit from the Cohesion Fund, among other things, which come at the top of the list. This being the case, let me now come to the proposals made in the report. We note, first of all, that the committee considers the data, as presented in the Commission’s annual report, to be in too aggregated a form to enable an in-depth evaluation of state aid policy which is simultaneously legitimate, sensitive to national interests and extensive in terms of compliance with the rules of competition, pursuant to the actual terms of the Treaty. The Commission can only collate and analyse the data provided by the Member States. It is therefore down to the states and regions to ensure the quality of the data provided, and our committee considers that additional efforts must be made in this respect. It is in this spirit that our parliamentary committee for example, has championed the longstanding idea of a public register of state aid, accessible via the Internet. Having better, more detailed information available, particularly with regard to the objectives pursued and the results recorded, must make it possible for the European Commission to itself proceed or to commission in a regular manner studies of the social and economic evaluation of national and regional state aid policies. And insofar as such studies already exist, to publish more openly its own comments with regard to the objectives of the Treaties, which are not only to ensure the competitivity of the European economy, but also sustainable development and economic and social cohesion. By stressing, primarily, the quality of the information provided, our debate in committee, and hence the report which it is my honour to present to you, avoided a simplistic response in the form of an a priori statement that the level of state aid was, in absolute terms, either too high or not high enough. Most committee members have sought rather to find a balance between, on the one hand, the need to see that both states and businesses comply with the competition rules and, on the other hand, acknowledgement of the value of such aid with a view to contributing to the objectives of the Treaty, particularly, as I have said already, as regards sustainable development, research and development and economic and social cohesion. This being the case, various amendments to the rapporteur’s initial draft report were adopted in committee, particularly highlighting the need for effective reimbursement of aid found to be illegal as well as the establishment of a league table of results. Seven amendments have been retabled for this plenary sitting. Most of them are an expression of the political differences among ourselves regarding the appropriateness and effectiveness of state aid, in view of the inadequacies, acknowledged or not, of private investment alone, the market failures or inadequacies of the market. There is in particular one amendment, let me point out, concerning the energy sector, which, in my capacity as rapporteur, I see as particularly important. I should like to conclude this presentation, Commissioner, by stressing two things: firstly, a concern of the members of the committee and, secondly, a demand of our committee. The concern involves the pre-accession process for the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, in terms of competition policy and state aid. This is undoubtedly a complex issue, and one where we should like to see the Commission informing us of the latest development in the matter, particularly in terms of the capacity of the economies involved in the accession process to comply with competition rules and, as far as state aid is concerned, the need, in all probability, to have specific rules on state aid used to assist restructuring of their sectors. And finally, in conclusion, our demand regarding the future responsibilities of the European Parliament in the matters we are discussing, competition policy and state aid, in the context of the Intergovernmental Conference. As you know, Commissioner, our report argues that the codecision procedure should apply in the case of basic legislation on state aid.

Political group: Verts-ALE