# CE2004084EN.01085701.xml

| 3.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 84/857 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 84/857

---

(2004/C 84 E/0949)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0719/04

by Ieke van den Burg (PSE) to the Commission

(10 March 2004)

Subject:   Training and development funds in the Netherlands as a contribution to the Lisbon strategy

Subject:

The Netherlands is active, on the basis of the Lisbon strategy and Council opinion, in deploying initiatives jointly with the social partners to combat unemployment among lower-skilled workers. An important means of financing such activities is being created in the form of contributions by the social partners to training and development funds. These funds are private contributions financed from the margin arising out of wage negotiations. Where a sectoral collective bargain is struck, the relevant collective-bargaining provisions can be declared generally binding. In 2003, the Netherlands Supreme Court delivered a judgment confirming that a generally binding declaration adopted as part of a collective bargaining agreement did not amount to a form of state support (Case C01/117HR). A number of governments are reported to have written to the Commission about the policy of the Competition DG, which does in fact designate such training funds as public-sector support.

| 1. | Does the Commission agree that committing resources from collectively financed training funds to job-creation schemes can contribute favourably to achieving the Lisbon objectives and improving employee qualifications? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Does the Commission agree that committing resources from collectively financed training funds to job-creation schemes can contribute favourably to achieving the Lisbon objectives and improving employee qualifications?

| 2. | Does the Commission also agree that a conflict exists between the commitment expected of the social partners under the Lisbon strategy and the Commission's attitude in designating the provision of such resources as public-sector funding? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Does the Commission also agree that a conflict exists between the commitment expected of the social partners under the Lisbon strategy and the Commission's attitude in designating the provision of such resources as public-sector funding?

| 3. | Can the Commission confirm that different governments have made representations to it in this connection? When will the Commission answer them, and what will the main thrust of its answer be? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Can the Commission confirm that different governments have made representations to it in this connection? When will the Commission answer them, and what will the main thrust of its answer be?

| 4. | Is the Commission prepared to improve policy coordination by its directorates-general and to cooperate in finding a quick solution to the impasse so as to enable training and development funds to be fully committed in support of the Lisbon strategy? |
| --- | --- |

4.

Is the Commission prepared to improve policy coordination by its directorates-general and to cooperate in finding a quick solution to the impasse so as to enable training and development funds to be fully committed in support of the Lisbon strategy?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(30 April 2004)

(30 April 2004)

| 1. | Training funds undoubtedly make a positive contribution to implementing the Lisbon strategy. They can bring about a quantitative and qualitative improvement in employment and contribute to a policy of life-long training. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Training funds undoubtedly make a positive contribution to implementing the Lisbon strategy. They can bring about a quantitative and qualitative improvement in employment and contribute to a policy of life-long training.

| 2. | As part of its examination of whether state aid schemes are compatible, the Commission takes into consideration the objectives of other Union policies, including those of employment policy, and incorporates them into its analysis.
  First of all it has to determine on the basis of objective criteria whether the funding in question constitutes state aid within the meaning of the EC Treaty. If a state scheme distorts free competition and affects intra-Community trade by conferring an advantage on one or more enterprises it constitutes state aid. As part of its examination of whether the aid is compatible with the EC Treaty, the Commission then takes account of the scheme's effects, which naturally include social effects, on other Union policies. The Lisbon strategy could only be considered incompatible with policy on state aid if the measures taken to implement it were classified as state aid that is incompatible with the EC Treaty.
  To date no decision has been taken on the status of training funds. Although in certain circumstances funds may cause distortion of competition, training funds do not necessarily do so. Taking account of those funds' undoubtedly beneficial effects and their contribution to attaining the Lisbon strategy objectives, the Commission sees no reason to consider the training funds of which it is currently aware to have a significant impact on competition and intra-Community trade. It considers that the public authorities are justified in giving firms incentives to improve employment levels and workforce skills. Consequently, the objectives of the Lisbon strategy and those of state aid policy are certainly not incompatible. |
| --- | --- |

2.

As part of its examination of whether state aid schemes are compatible, the Commission takes into consideration the objectives of other Union policies, including those of employment policy, and incorporates them into its analysis.

First of all it has to determine on the basis of objective criteria whether the funding in question constitutes state aid within the meaning of the EC Treaty. If a state scheme distorts free competition and affects intra-Community trade by conferring an advantage on one or more enterprises it constitutes state aid. As part of its examination of whether the aid is compatible with the EC Treaty, the Commission then takes account of the scheme's effects, which naturally include social effects, on other Union policies. The Lisbon strategy could only be considered incompatible with policy on state aid if the measures taken to implement it were classified as state aid that is incompatible with the EC Treaty.

To date no decision has been taken on the status of training funds. Although in certain circumstances funds may cause distortion of competition, training funds do not necessarily do so. Taking account of those funds' undoubtedly beneficial effects and their contribution to attaining the Lisbon strategy objectives, the Commission sees no reason to consider the training funds of which it is currently aware to have a significant impact on competition and intra-Community trade. It considers that the public authorities are justified in giving firms incentives to improve employment levels and workforce skills. Consequently, the objectives of the Lisbon strategy and those of state aid policy are certainly not incompatible.

| 3. | So far, only two Member States have been in touch with the Commission concerning training funds. The Commission is currently examining those cases in relation to the various policies of the Union. At the present moment, it has not adopted a final position on the substance of those decisions. In any event, it will undoubtedly take account of the favourable social effect of the schemes. Moreover, it is currently developing an economic approach that allows a flexible appraisal of aid schemes that are unlikely to have a significant effect on competition and intra-Community trade. |
| --- | --- |

3.

So far, only two Member States have been in touch with the Commission concerning training funds. The Commission is currently examining those cases in relation to the various policies of the Union. At the present moment, it has not adopted a final position on the substance of those decisions. In any event, it will undoubtedly take account of the favourable social effect of the schemes. Moreover, it is currently developing an economic approach that allows a flexible appraisal of aid schemes that are unlikely to have a significant effect on competition and intra-Community trade.

| 4. | Examination of all aspects of the training fund cases is fully coordinated within the Commission. The development of the abovementioned economic approach should allow it to appraise the effects of those funds and the favourable contribution they can make to improving conditions of employment. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Examination of all aspects of the training fund cases is fully coordinated within the Commission. The development of the abovementioned economic approach should allow it to appraise the effects of those funds and the favourable contribution they can make to improving conditions of employment.

---