# CE2004070EN.01013101.xml

| 20.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 70/131 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 70/131

---

(2004/C 70 E/133)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2721/03

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Council

(11 September 2003)

Subject:   Measures to safeguard EU plans for a dynamic knowledge society in 2010 against unintended negative effects of the Stability Pact

Subject:

| 1. | Is the Council aware that the German newspaper Handelsblatt and subsequently the Netherlands newspaper Staatscourant of 14 August 2003 report that Commissioner Diamantopoulou believes that the European Growth and Stability Pact will in future pose a serious threat to education and scientific research budgets in EU Member States as result of the 3 % ceiling on budget deficits, making it impossible to achieve the target established in Lisbon in 2000 of making the EU the world's most dynamic knowledge economy by 2010? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is the Council aware that the German newspaper Handelsblatt and subsequently the Netherlands newspaper Staatscourant of 14 August 2003 report that Commissioner Diamantopoulou believes that the European Growth and Stability Pact will in future pose a serious threat to education and scientific research budgets in EU Member States as result of the 3 % ceiling on budget deficits, making it impossible to achieve the target established in Lisbon in 2000 of making the EU the world's most dynamic knowledge economy by 2010?

| 2. | Is the Council aware that Commissioner Diamantopoulou is advocating that this serious problem should be solved by no longer counting government investment in education and research for the purposes of the ceilings established in the Stability Pact? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Is the Council aware that Commissioner Diamantopoulou is advocating that this serious problem should be solved by no longer counting government investment in education and research for the purposes of the ceilings established in the Stability Pact?

| 3. | Can the Council confirm that a virtually insoluble situation is likely to arise now that Germany, France, Italy and Portugal no longer appear to be able to keep to the 3 % ceiling in the longer term, new Member States with a weak budget position are about to join the EU and the heavy fines that have to be imposed on those who exceed the ceiling are in danger of exacerbating the situation? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Can the Council confirm that a virtually insoluble situation is likely to arise now that Germany, France, Italy and Portugal no longer appear to be able to keep to the 3 % ceiling in the longer term, new Member States with a weak budget position are about to join the EU and the heavy fines that have to be imposed on those who exceed the ceiling are in danger of exacerbating the situation?

| 4. | Does the Council agree with Commissioner Diamantopoulou that no one seems to have the courage to take the necessary steps to revise the 3 % rule which has become unworkable and that as a result Member States are resorting to unilateral action to the detriment of the EU economy? |
| --- | --- |

4.

Does the Council agree with Commissioner Diamantopoulou that no one seems to have the courage to take the necessary steps to revise the 3 % rule which has become unworkable and that as a result Member States are resorting to unilateral action to the detriment of the EU economy?

| 5. | Is the Council using the means available to it to break this deadlock and will action be taken before the end of the Italian Presidency? |
| --- | --- |

5.

Is the Council using the means available to it to break this deadlock and will action be taken before the end of the Italian Presidency?

| 6. | How long does the Council anticipate it will take before the urgently needed changes are actually made to the Stability Pact, for instance by adopting the method proposed by Commissioner Diamantopoulou? |
| --- | --- |

6.

How long does the Council anticipate it will take before the urgently needed changes are actually made to the Stability Pact, for instance by adopting the method proposed by Commissioner Diamantopoulou?

Reply

(8 December 2003)

(8 December 2003)

The Council never comments on public statements such as those mentioned by the Honourable Parliamentarian.

Detailed provisions for the submission of budgetary data in the context of the Stability and Growth Pact are laid down in Council Regulation (EC) No 3605/93 of 22 November 1993. The data provided for the national accounts must conform to the provisions of Council Regulation (EC) No 2223/96 of 25 June 1996 on the European System of National and Regional Accounts in the Community (commonly referred to as ESA 95). Any revision to these Regulations to exclude certain categories of expenditure, or to Regulations (EC) Nos 1466/97 and 1467/97 to change the content of the Pact itself, could only be made on the basis of a proposal from the Commission. The Commission has not brought forward any such proposal.

The Ecofin Council's report on ‘Strengthening the co-ordination of budgetary policies’, endorsed by the Spring 2003 European Council, stated that ‘there is no need to change either the Treaty or the Stability and Growth Pact, nor to introduce new budgetary objectives or rules.’ The same report noted that ‘greater attention should be paid, within the overall constraints of the Stability and Growth Pact, to the quality of public finances with a view to raising the growth potential of the EU economies in conformity with the Lisbon agenda’. The Council will continue to implement the Pact in line with this report.

---