# CE2004078EN.01004001.xml

| 27.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 78/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 78/40

---

(2004/C 78 E/0039)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1596/03

by Regina Bastos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(6 May 2003)

Subject:   Closure of ‘Schuh-Union’ located in Ponte de Lima, Portugal

Subject:

The German shoe company Schuh-Union closed its factory in Ponte de Lima and more than 180 workers lost their jobs. Management informed staff about the definitive closure by simply putting up a notice at the entrance to the factory.

The company had drawn up a protocol guaranteeing that it would stay in Ponte de Lima for at least 20 years, but it closed down after only 12 years.

Management blamed the closure on a shortage of orders, but in actual fact the orders had been passed on to other factories in Romania and Turkey, where labour is cheaper.

In May 2002 Schuh-Union already closed the factory at Maia (Portugal) in order to relocate to Romania, depriving 460 workers of their jobs. At that time management claimed that the closure would enable the factory at Ponte de Lima to maintain its full production capacity and retain all the staff.

Nevertheless, in October 2002 Schuh-Union closed the cutting and stitching section of its Ponte de Lima factory, which immediately made 172 workers redundant.

It should be noted that 97 % of the staff are women aged between 40 and 50, who will naturally find it difficult to find other jobs, especially in a town where there are few job opportunities.

Can the Commission therefore say:

| — | whether Schuh-Union has received any Community funding; |
| --- | --- |

—

whether Schuh-Union has received any Community funding;

| — | if so, how much it received, when, and what conditions were imposed on the company? |
| --- | --- |

—

if so, how much it received, when, and what conditions were imposed on the company?

Supplementary answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(30 September 2003)

(30 September 2003)

The Commission can inform the Honourable Member that Schuh-Union received no aid from the European Social Fund but did receive from the European Regional Development Fund PTE 199 431 000 (part-financing of a total cost of PTE 280 735 000) for two projects, one approved on 12 November 1992 under the PNICIAP programme and one approved on 2 March 1998 under the programme for modernisation of the economic fabric.

These aids was allocated by Portugal under aid schemes approved by the Commission. Portugal is, however, responsible for seeing that the Community rules on competition are respected and the Commission will ask her authorities to check if this has been the case in connection with the aid granted to Schuh-Union.

The location of enterprises is primarily a matter for those who head them. However, under the new regulatory provisions on Structural Fund financing for the 2000-2006 programming period, Member States are to ensure that during the five years following the decision to grant aid no substantial project modification, including no ‘change of location in a productive activity’, occurs (1). The Guidelines on national regional aid adopted by the Commission on 10 March 1998 require both capital assets financed and jobs created to be maintained for at least five years from the time at which the aided investment was made.

1

---

(1)  Article 30(4)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999.

1

---