# CE2004088EN.01032401.xml

| 8.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 88/324 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 88/324

---

(2004/C 88 E/0329)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0430/03

by Rosa Miguélez Ramos (PSE) to the Commission

(18 February 2003)

Subject:   ‘Prestige’: State aid

Subject:

The disaster resulting from the sinking of the Prestige oil tanker off the coast of Galicia has caused severe losses for many firms linked to the fishing industry and other marine activities, as well as significant socioeconomic troubles for the regions affected.

The possibilities for alleviating these enormous losses include various exceptions to the rule laid down by Article 87(2) of the Treaty, which establishes the incompatibility with the common market of aid granted by the Member States to certain firms or for the production of certain goods. Paragraph 2(b) of that article states that ‘aid to make good the damage caused by natural disasters or exceptional occurrences’ is compatible with the common market.

Furthermore, Article 87(3)(e) states that ‘such other categories of aid as may be specified by decision of the Council acting by a qualified majority on a proposal from the Commission may be considered to be compatible with the common market’.

In addition, Article 88 establishes that ‘on application by a Member State, the Council may (...) decide that aid which that State is granting or intends to grant shall be considered to be compatible with the common market, (...) if such a decision is justified by exceptional circumstances.’

Can the Commission provide information on the initiatives it has put forward so that, in accordance with Article 87 of the Treaty, the firms affected are able to alleviate the losses resulting from this disaster by means of state aid, without this being considered incompatible with the common market?

Has any Member State submitted an application to be able to grant aid to firms or for the production of certain goods adversely affected by this disaster?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(1 April 2003)

(1 April 2003)

Under Articles 87 et seq. of the EC Treaty, to which the Honourable Member refers, the Commission has a specific power to decide on compatibility of State aids with the common market. On the other hand it falls to Member States, not to the Commission, to take the initiative in proposing aids that can be considered compatible. No Member State has so far sent any proposal for fishery or aquaculture sector aid in connection with the Prestige disaster. It should be made clear however that under Article 19(2) of Regulation 2792/1999 (1), as amended by Regulation 2369/2002 (2), the Member States' obligatory financial contributions to development plan measures co-financed by the Community need no longer be notified to the Commission in advance.

1

2

In the same Structural Fund context the Commission, using its powers of initiative under the EC Treaty, sent the Council a proposal (3) for a Regulation, following which the Council adopted Regulation (EC) 2372/2002 of 20 December 2002 instituting specific measures to compensate individuals and enterprises in the Spanish fishing, shellfish culture and aquaculture industries affected by oil spills from the Prestige (4). Waiving certain provisions of Regulation (EC) No2792/1999 and providing additional Community funding, this Regulation affords an exceptional level of support in the Spanish coastal zones affected. In addition, under the existing Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance (FIFG) provisions compensation for temporary cessation of activities can be given to fishermen from other Member States who have had to stop fishing because of the Prestige disaster. The Commission has not yet received any applications to this end.

3

4

---

(1)  OJ L 337, 30.12.1999.

1

(2)  Council Regulation, (EC) No 2369/2002, of 20 December 2002 amending Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999 laying down detailed rules and arrangements regarding Community structural assistance in the fisheries sector, OJ L 358, 31.12.2002.

2

(3)  COM(2002) 766 final.

3

(4)  OJ L 358, 31.12.2002.

4

---