ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1864/03

by Avril Doyle (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(6 June 2003)

Subject: Hazardous waste

In April the Mulheim of Duisberg, a German registered ship, went aground at the tip of Cornwall. It was carrying a cargo of 2 200 tonnes of shredded car waste from Cork in Ireland to Lubeck in Germany.

What evidence has the Commission that this cargo was sampled before it left Ireland?

Did it contain any hazardous PCBs?

Why is Ireland exporting this shredded car waste to Germany and not dealing with it under the proximity principle?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(8 July 2003)

In general, the Commission is not informed in advance about shipments of waste within the Community and it has not been contacted regarding this specific shipment, neither by the Irish authorities nor by the German authorities.

The Commission does not, therefore, possess any information about this shipment and its contents.

Regarding the application of the proximity principle by the Irish authorities, it should be noted that it is a principle that Member States may apply it is not compulsory. On top of this, the principle only applies to shipments of waste destined for disposal and not to waste destined for recovery.

The proximity principle in this context is laid down in Article 4(3)(a) of the Waste Shipment Regulation (Council Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 of 1 February 1993 on the supervision and control of shipments of waste within, into and out of the Community(1)).

(1) OJ L 30, 6.2.1993.
(2004/C58E/077) WRITTENQUESTIONE-1319/03
byEllyPlooij-vanGorsel(ELDR)totheCommission
(7April2003)
Subject:SuspecteddistortionofcompetitionasaresultofillegalStateaidprovidedtoSpanishshipbuilders
bytheSpanishgovernment
In November 2001 the shipbuilding industry lodged a complaint with the Commission concerning
suspecteddistortionofcompetitionasaresultofillegalStateaidtotheSpanishshipbuildingindustry
provided by the Spanish government. This distortion of competition could weaken the European
shipbuildingindustry.TheCommission’sinvestigationsrevealednoevidencesupportingthesuggestionthattheSpanishgovernmenthadprovidedillegalStateaidtoSpanishshipbuilders.InDecember2002theshipbuildingindustrylodgedafurthercomplaintprovidinganumberofillustrationscorroboratingthesuspicionsofstateaid.
Spanishshipbuildersareinapositionwheretheycanaskmuchlowerpricesthanshipbuildingfirmsfrom
otherEUMemberStates.ThereisnoreasontoassumethatSpanishshipbuildingfirmsareabletoproducesignificantly more cheaply than their counterparts elsewhere in the EU. This gives clear grounds forassumingthattheillegalStateaidmaybeinvolved.
OnlyrecentlytheSpanishgovernmentgrantedasubsidyofapproximatelyEUR500milliontotheSpanish
shipbuildingindustryforresearchanddevelopment.
1. IstheCommissionawareofrecentdevelopmentsconcerningthisallegedStateaidand,ifso,isit
investigatingthis?
2. DoestheCommissionbelievethatillegalStateaidisbeinggrantedbytheSpanishgovernmenttothe
Spanishshipbuildingindustry?
3. HowdoestheCommissionviewthesubsidyofEUR500millionrecentlygrantedbytheSpanish
governmenttotheSpanishshipbuildingindustryintermsoffaircompetition?WasBrusselsnotifiedofthissubsidy?
AnswergivenbyMrMontionbehalfoftheCommission
(27May2003)
1. Itisassumedthatthefirstquestionreferstotheissuesmentionedinthefirstparagraphabove.
It is correct, as the Honourable Member points out, that the Commission, on the basis of available
information,hasnotbeenabletofindanyproofofillegalaidactuallyofferedorgrantedbytheSpanishGovernmenttoSpanishshipbuildersinthereferredcase.ItcanbenotedthatthecomplaintconcernedallegedaidtoprivateSpanishshipyards.
The further complaint lodged in December 2002 concerns the public Spanish shipyards, and may
thereforenotbedirectlylinkedtothepreviouscomplaint.TheCommissionisstillinvestigatingthisissue.
2. TheCommissionhasaprocedureopen(
1)onstateaidcaseC40/00,whichconcernssuspicionsthat
illegalstateaidhasbeenprovidedtothepublicSpanishshipyards.
3. The Commissionis notaware ofany decision by the Spanish government togrant the alleged
EUR500milliontotheSpanishshipbuildingindustryasaidforResearchandTechnologicalDevelopment.
(1) OJC328,18.11.2000andOJC21,24.1.2002.6.3.2004EN C58E/59 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion
(2004/C58E/053) WRITTENQUESTIONE-1037/03
byRobertaAngelilli(UEN)totheCommission
(28March2003)
Subject:UseoffundsfromtheLeader+programmebythemunicipalityofLivorno
InSeptember2002,themonitoringcommitteeoftheItalianMinistryforEconomicAffairsissuedareport
onthespendingofEUfunds.
ThereportrevealsthealarmingslownessandinefficiencywithwhichEUfundsareallocatedtoprojectsby
someregionalauthorities.
ThegraveconcernsabouttheinadequateuseofEuropeanfundsbylocalauthoritieshavefrequentlybeen
echoedbytheCommission.
Bearinginmindthatsomelocalauthorities,suchasthemunicipalityofLivorno,urgentlyneedtouse
Europeanfundstosupportinnovativeruraldevelopmentmeasuresaimedatenhancingtheculturalandnaturalheritage,creatingnewjobsbystrengtheningthelocaleconomyandimprovingtheorganisationalcapacityofruralcommunities,
cantheCommissionstate:
1. whetherthemunicipalityofLivornohassubmittedprojectsfortheLeader+programme?2. whetherthemunicipalityofLivornohassecuredfundingfortheseprojects?3. whetherthisfundinghasbeenused?
(2004/C58E/054) WRITTENQUESTIONE-1039/03
byRobertaAngelilli(UEN)totheCommission
(28March2003)
Subject:UseoffundsfromtheLeader+programmebythemunicipalityofMassa
InSeptember2002,themonitoringcommitteeoftheItalianMinistryforEconomicAffairsissuedareport
onthespendingofEUfunds.
ThereportrevealsthealarmingslownessandinefficiencywithwhichEUfundsareallocatedtoprojectsby
someregionalauthorities.
ThegraveconcernsabouttheinadequateuseofEuropeanfundsbylocalauthoritieshavefrequentlybeen
echoedbytheCommission.
Bearing inmindthatsomelocalauthorities,suchasthemunicipality ofMassa,urgentlyneedtouse
Europeanfundstosupportinnovativeruraldevelopmentmeasuresaimedatenhancingtheculturalandnaturalheritage,creatingnewjobsbystrengtheningthelocaleconomyandimprovingtheorganisationalcapacityofruralcommunities,
cantheCommissionstate:
1. whetherthemunicipalityofMassahassubmittedprojectsfortheLeader+programme?2. whetherthemunicipalityofMassahassecuredfundingfortheseprojects?3. whetherthisfundinghasbeenused?C58E/42 EN6.3.2004 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion
(2004/C58E/028) WRITTENQUESTIONE-0720/03
byRosaMiguélezRamos(PSE)totheCommission
(11March2003)
Subject:‘Prestige’:EUactionatWTOlevel
On19December2002theEuropeanParliamentadoptedaresolutiononsafetyatseaandmeasuresto
alleviatetheeffectsofthe‘Prestige’disaster.Paragraph5reads:
RecognisesthefactthattheEUhasonlylimitedpowertocontrolshipsintransitthroughitswaters;
thereforecallsontheCounciltoactquicklytogranttheCommissionthemandatetonegotiateonbehalfofall15MemberStateswithintheInternationalMaritimeOrganisation,withparticularregardtotheestablishmentofmorestringentrulesonPortStateControlinthirdcountries,thedevelopmentofaFlagStateauditprocedureaimedatcombatingflagsofconvenience,asdefinedbytheParisMemorandumofUnderstanding,andtheproperimplementationofcompulsoryshippingroutesandpilotage andthe restriction ofshipping in designatedParticularly Sensitive Sea Areas inorder to
protect sensitive coastlines;given the slowprocess ofdecision-making at IMO level, callsonthe
CommissionsimultaneouslytoinitiatebilateralnegotiationswithkeythirdcountrieswithaviewtoimprovingthesafetyofshipsintransitthroughEUwaters.
HowdoestheCommissionviewthisrequestfromParliament?Whatstepshasittakenordoesitintendtotakeinresponse?
(2004/C58E/029) WRITTENQUESTIONE-0722/03
byRosaMiguélezRamos(PSE)totheCommission
(11March2003)
Subject:‘Prestige’:settingupaEuropeancoastguardsservice
On19December2002theEuropeanParliamentadoptedaresolutiononsafetyatseaandmeasuresto
alleviate the effects of the ‘Prestige’ disaster. Paragraph20 calls for ‘the setting up of a EuropeanCoastguardsServicewhichcanworkinclosecooperationwithmaritimetrafficcontrollers’.
WhatmeasureshastheCommissiontakenordoesitintendtotakeinresponse?
(2004/C58E/030) WRITTENQUESTIONE-0723/03
byRosaMiguélezRamos(PSE)totheCommission
(11March2003)
Subject:‘Prestige’:identificationofparticularlysensitiveseaareas
On19December2002theEuropeanParliamentadoptedaresolutiononsafetyatseaandmeasuresto
alleviatetheeffectsofthe‘Prestige’disaster.Paragraph21reads:
Considersthataprotection,preventionandmonitoringplanformaritimetransportroutesintheEU
regionswhicharemostvulnerabletoaccidentsinvolvingoilandchemicalsshouldbedrafted,andthese areas should be identified as Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas by the International MaritimeOrganisation.
WhatmeasureshastheCommissiontakenordoesitintendtotakeinresponse?C58E/26 EN6.3.2004 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion
The Union, Commission and Member states, have repeatedly urged the Government of Vietnam to
strengthen its respect for political and religious freedoms, to further strengthen economic and socialfreedomsandtocreatealegalframeworkforasupportiveenvironmenttoallowthedevelopmentofastrengthenedcivilsociety,fromwhichVietnamwouldgreatlybenefit.CommissionandMemberstateshaveexpressedtheserequestsintheirjointdeclarationattheConsultativeGroupmeetinginHanoiinDecember2002.
The May 2001 Commission Communication on the Union’s Role in Promoting Human Rights and
DemocratisationinThirdCountriesconfirmedthattheCommissionwouldtakeactiontoenhancethepositiveimpactofCommunityassistanceprogrammesonrespectforhumanrightsanddemocratisationby/dashinteralia/dashtakingperformanceintheareaofhumanrights(includingsocial,economicandculturalrights)intoaccountwhendecidingcountryallocationsunderthemainco-operationprogrammes.
InadditiontotheexplanationsgiveninthereplytoWrittenQuestionE-454/03,referredtoabove,the
CommissionwouldliketodrawtheattentionoftheHonourableMembertothefactthatanexploratorymissionoftheCommissionhasnowbeensenttoVietnamtolookatpossibilities,involvinginteraliatheethnicminorities,toreducepovertyintheCentralHighlandsandthustodealwithsomeoftherootcausesoftheproblemsinthearea.
(1) Seepage18.
(2004/C58E/023) WRITTENQUESTIONP-0556/03
byMaríaIzquierdoRojo(PSE)totheCommission
(20February2003)
Subject:EuropeanfundingandthebanningofwomenfromMountAthos
TheEuropeanParliamenthasrecentlyadoptedtwomotionsforresolutions(SwiebelandIzquierdoRojo
reports)inwhichitopposedthebanningofwomenfromMountAthos.Itshouldalsobeborneinmind
thatthemonasteryregionofMountAthoshasbeengrantedaidtorestoreandrenovatemonasteriesandpreserveculturaltreasures,whichbelongtobothmenandwomen.
CantheCommissionanswerthefollowing:
1. HowmuchEuropeanfundinghasbeenallocatedforthispurpose?
2. DoestheCommissionnottaketheviewthatitismandatoryforthe‘acquiscommunautaire’tobe
applied,inlinewiththeEU’sfundamentalprinciples?
3. WhatEuropeanEconomicAreafundingmechanismhasbeenusedtobenefittheregioneconomically?4. Under the Community support framework for Greece, in what specific way is such aid granted
throughthestructuralfunds?Whatcriteriahavebeenusedtodefinethefieldsofstructuraladjustmentandeconomicdevelopment?
AnswergivenbyMrBarnieronbehalfoftheCommission
(7March2003)
TheCommissioniscollectingtheinformationitneedstoanswerthequestion.Itwillcommunicateits
findingsassoonaspossible.6.3.2004EN C58E/21 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion
TheHonourableMemberwillunderstandthatforreasonsofnon-discrimination,entitiesfromboththe
privateandthepublicsectorhavetosubmitauditcertificates.However,publicentitiescanhavetheirauditcertificatesdeliveredeitherbyanexternalauditororbyapubliccompetentofficer(seealsoArticle14oftheabovementionedRegulation).Thelatterwillcertainlyreducethecostsrelatedtotheauditcertificatesforpublicbodies.
ItshouldalsobenotedthatthecostsofauditcertificatesarefullycoveredbytheCommunityfunding
contributionunderthemanagementactivityforeseenineachprojectandrepresentonlyaminorportionofthetotalcostsoftheprojects,thegreatbulkofwhichisdevotedtocarryingouttheresearchwork.
(1) OJL355,30.12.2002.
(2004/C58E/121) WRITTENQUESTIONE-1883/03
byChristopherHuhne(ELDR)totheCommission
(6June2003)
Subject:Tradeimpactofeuro
WilltheCommissionsummarisetheconclusionsofanymajorstudies,includingitsown,ontheimpactof
theeuroontradewithintheeuro-area?Willitestimatethesizeofanyincreaseintradeasaresultoftheintroductionoftheeuro?
AnswergivenbyMrSolbesMiraonbehalfoftheCommission
(14July2003)
Severalstudieshavebeenmadeontheimpactoftheeuroontradewithintheeuro-area,althoughthe
periodsincetheintroductionofthesinglecurrencyisstillshortandthetotaleffecthasprobablynotyetoccurred.Thesestudiesfindasignificantincreaseoftradeasaresultoftheeuro-introduction.
Looking at the euro-area Barr, Breedon and Miles(
1) come to the conclusion that the Economic and
MonetaryUnion(EMU)hasalreadyledtoa29%increaseintheleveloftradebetweeneuromembers.AlsousingdatafromEuropeancountriesMicco,SteinandOrdonez(
2)findasizeableeffectforthebilateral
tradebetweenthemembersoftheEurozone:theEMUeffectisestimatedtohaveincreasedtradebetween
12and19%.Finally,BunandKlaassen(3)concludeintheirstudyontheeffectontradeanincreaseof4%
inthefirstyearandaprojectedlongruneffectofabout40%.
Recently the United Kingdom Treasury has published several background EMU-studies to inform the
assessmentofthefiveeconomictestsonUK-membershipofthesinglecurrency.Inoneofthesestudies,EMUandtrade,anoverviewofstudiesontheeffectsofcurrency-unionsontradeandspecificallyofEMUontradecanbefound.
(1) BarrD.,F.BreedonandD.Miles,Lifeontheoutside:economicconditionsandprospectsoutsideEurolandin
EconomicPolicy,2003,forthcoming.
(2) MiccoA.,E.SteinandG.Ordonez,Thecurrencyunioneffectontrade:earlyevidencefromtheEuropeanUnion,
InterAmericanDevelopmentBank2002.
(3) Bun M. and F. Klaassen, Has the euro increased trade?, Tinbergen Institute Discussion Paper No 02-108/2,
UniversityofAmsterdam2002.C58E/106 EN6.3.2004 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion
AnswergivenbyMrsDiamantopoulouonbehalfoftheCommission
(15October2003)
TheCommissionlaunchedtwoinvitationstotenderforastudyontheconsequencesofthejudgmentof
theCourtofJusticeintheSIMAPcase(1).Unfortunately,theCommissiondidnotreceiveanybidsbefore
thedeadlineinresponsetothefirstinvitationtotenderandtheonlybidreceivedinresponsetothesecondinvitationtotenderwasnotacceptable.
TheCommissionplanstolaunchanewinvitationtotenderassoonaspossible.
Finally,thetransposalofDirective2000/34/CEoftheParliamentandoftheCouncilof22June2000was
notontheagendaofthemeetingwiththenationalexpertsonworkingtimetowhichtheHonourableMemberrefers.
(1) JudgmentoftheCourtof3October2000incaseC-303/98,SindicatodeMédicosdeAsistenciaPública(SIMAP)
andConselleriadeSanidadyConsumodelaGeneralidadValenciana.
(2004/C58E/202) WRITTENQUESTIONE-2619/03
byAlexandrosAlavanos(GUE/NGL)totheCommission
(2September2003)
Subject:Fulfilment by the firm Beiersdorf Hellas of commitments arising from the funding of its
modernisation
In June 1996 the Ministries of the National Economy and of Development issued a joint ministerial
decision approving the application ofthe provisions oflaw 1892/90toBeiersdorf Hellas’sthree-yearbusinessplan,andasaresultitsfundingfromthesecondCommunitysupportframework.BeiersdorfHellasoughttohaveusedtheinvestmenttosupportproductionofitsproductsandtomaintainandincreasethenumberofitspermanentpoststo288.Infact,startingin1998/dashbeforeithadfinishedimplementingitsbusinessplan/dashitbegantoreducestaffnumbers,whichfellfrom231in1998to192in2002, while its production decreased from 1900 tonnes in 1996 to 900 in 2002. Recently, theundertakingannouncedthedefinitiveclosureofitsproductionunit.Sincethisbusinessisevidentlynot
fulfilling the commitments it made, does the Commission intend to investigate this case and, if the
allegationsprovetobetrue,whatmeasuresdoesitintendtotake?
AnswergivenbyMrBarnieronbehalfoftheCommission
(10October2003)
Beiersdorf Hellas’ project was part-financed by the Community under the ‘Industry’ Operational
Programme1994-99.
TheCommissionhasbeeninformedbytheGreekauthoritiesthatofficialinspectionshowedareductionin
thefirm’sstaffnumbersandthatthisfailuretosatisfythetermsunderwhichtheinvestmentprojectwas
part-financedledtheLaw1892/90ConsultativeCommittee,meetingon9Julythisyear,toimposeapenaltyofEUR74748,02underthatLaw.
TheauthoritieshaveinformedtheCommissionthattherelevantdepartmentwillinvestigatethematterof
achangeinthefirm’sactivitiessothatitcandecidewhetherthesubsidyoughttoberecoveredinpartorinfullandapenaltyappliedunderLaw1892/90.
PendingnotificationofthedetailedconclusionsfromtheinvestigationtheCommissionwillitselflook
carefullyintothematterwhentheIndustryOperationalProgrammeisclosed.C58E/188 EN6.3.2004 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion
(2004/C58E/090) WRITTENQUESTIONP-1512/03
byMarioMauro(PPE-DE)totheCommission
(29April2003)
Subject:ThecaseofOrieldeArmasPeraza
TheCubanexileOrieldeArmasPeraza,whohasbeenlivingforayearinVicenza(Italy)withhiswifeand
four-year-olddaughter,isanactivememberofthehumanrightsassociation‘CubanPatrioticAlliance’andisawaitingareplytoanapplicationforpoliticalasylumlodgedwiththerelevantItalianauthorities.Thereisnodoubtthat,becauseofhisfrequentcriticismsoftheCastroregime,MrOrieldeArmaswillbearrestedforhispoliticalactivitiesifheissentbacktoCuba.
Hissituationisposingaproblem,however,becausehedoesnothavehealthinsuranceandisunableto
securetreatmentforhisdaughter,whosuffersfromasthma.
The residence permit issued to Mr Oriel de Armas Peraza, which expired on 18August 2002, was
extendedbytheVicenzapoliceuntil14February2003pendingadecisiononhisapplicationforpoliticalasylum.
WilltheCommissiontakestepstoensurethat,insimilarcasesinvolvingseverehumanrightsabuses,
‘Europeanpoliticalasylum’canbegrantedtoenablethosesuchasCubanexileOrieldeArmasPerazaandhisfamilytorenewtheirresidencepermits?
AnswergivenbyMrVitorinoonbehalfoftheCommission
(21May2003)
Inthefieldofasylum,therearenoCommunityprovisionsinplacebasedonArticle63oftheECTreaty
relatedtothematterraisedinthisquestion.TheproposalforaDirectiveonminimumstandardforthequalificationasarefugeeorasapersonotherwiseinneedofinternationalprotection(
1)isstillunder
discussionintheCouncil.Therefore,theCommissionhasnopowertointerveneonthatbasiswiththeItalianauthorities.
(1) OJC51E,26.2.2002.
(2004/C58E/091) WRITTENQUESTIONE-1515/03
byAndréBrie(GUE/NGL)totheCommission
(6May2003)
Subject:Extensive clearing of trees and bushes in FFH areas in the Elbe-Elster district, Brandenburg,
Germany
ForsometimenowextensiveclearingoftreesandbusheshasbeentakingplaceontheriversSchwarze
Elster, Pulsnitz and Röder (Elbe-Elster district, Brandenburg). The competent authority (BrandenburgRegionalEnvironmentOffice)hasjustifiedthisworkonthegroundsofthenecessaryrenovationandmaintenanceworkonthedykes.
TheseoperationshavebeenorarebeingcarriedoutinthefollowingdesignatedFFHareas:
/dash FFHarea509‘Pulsnitzandfloodplains’;
/dash FFHarea495‘MiddlereachoftheSchwarzeElster’;
/dash FFHarea231‘Arnsnesteafloodplains’;
/dash FFHarea498‘KleineRöder’.C58E/74 EN6.3.2004 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion
Bearinginmindthatsomelocalauthorities,suchasthemunicipalityofPistoia,urgentlyneedtouse
EuropeanfundstopromotethesafeuseoftheInternetandencourage,atEuropeanlevel,afavourableenvironmentforthedevelopmentoftherelevantsector,
cantheCommissionstate:
1. whetherthemunicipalityofPistoiahassubmittedprojectsfortheActionPlanonpromotingsaferuse
oftheInternet?
2. whetherthemunicipalityofPistoiahassecuredfundingfortheseprojects?
3. whetherthisfundinghasbeenused?
(2004/C58E/047) WRITTENQUESTIONE-1088/03
byRobertaAngelilli(UEN)totheCommission
(31March2003)
Subject:UseoffundsundertheActionPlanonpromotingsaferuseoftheInternetbythemunicipalityof
Prato
InSeptember2002,themonitoringcommitteeoftheItalianMinistryforEconomicAffairsissuedareport
onthespendingofEUfunds.
ThereportrevealsthealarmingslownessandinefficiencywithwhichEUfundsareallocatedtoprojectsby
someregionalauthorities.
ThegraveconcernsabouttheinadequateuseofEuropeanfundsbylocalauthoritieshavefrequentlybeen
echoedbytheCommission.
Bearing in mind that somelocalauthorities, such as the municipality ofPrato, urgently need touse
EuropeanfundstopromotethesafeuseoftheInternetandencourage,atEuropeanlevel,afavourableenvironmentforthedevelopmentoftherelevantsector,
cantheCommissionstate:
1. whetherthemunicipalityofPratohassubmittedprojectsfortheActionPlanonpromotingsaferuse
oftheInternet?
2. whetherthemunicipalityofPratohassecuredfundingfortheseprojects?
3. whetherthisfundinghasbeenused?
(2004/C58E/048) WRITTENQUESTIONE-1089/03
byRobertaAngelilli(UEN)totheCommission
(31March2003)
Subject:UseoffundsundertheActionPlanonpromotingsaferuseoftheInternetbythemunicipalityof
Siena
InSeptember2002,themonitoringcommitteeoftheItalianMinistryforEconomicAffairsissuedareport
onthespendingofEUfunds.
ThereportrevealsthealarmingslownessandinefficiencywithwhichEUfundsareallocatedtoprojectsby
someregionalauthorities.
ThegraveconcernsabouttheinadequateuseofEuropeanfundsbylocalauthoritieshavefrequentlybeen
echoedbytheCommission.C58E/38 EN6.3.2004 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 70/242

(2004/C 70 E/262)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3235/03

by Salvador Garriga Polledo (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(3 November 2003)

Subject: Incentives to invest in EU-related bonds

The Fifteen have advocated kick-starting growth in the European Union by increasing both public and private investment in infrastructure, R&D and innovation.

It is a well-known fact that, besides being one of the main driving forces for progress in the EU, the European Investment Bank (EIB) is responsible for much of the EU's infrastructure development, which is why encouraging people to take part in its public bond issues is of particular importance.

Does the Commission believe that, once the relevant studies have been conducted, it should look into the most appropriate means of encouraging Community citizens to take a greater interest in EIB bonds as their contribution to the so-called Lisbon strategy, which seeks to make the EU the world's most dynamic economy?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(2 December 2003)

The European Investment Bank (EIB) is among the world's largest debt issuers, raising EUR 41 billion so far this year, within the target set for 2003 (EUR 40 to 42 billion). In only five years, annual borrowings by the Bank have almost doubled.

This growing funding need, in line with the Bank's lending growth, has been conducted according to a consistent and balanced borrowing strategy. This strategy involves a proactive approach to addressing both institutional and retail investors, both of which play an important role as buyers of EIB securities.

As concerns the specific involvement of Union citizens in EIB bond issues, it is important to note that EIB enjoys a strong following in the European retail market. Retail investors buy a very wide variety of EIB bonds, but certain bond issues respond to the specific requirements of retail investors.

Marketing to retail investors needs to be carefully balanced against marketing to institutional investors, who remain central to the success of EIB's bond issuance as well as the subsequent performance of EIB bonds in the secondary market, in itself a key consideration. Also, the substantial costs of certain types of retail marketing, for example through advertising, are an important consideration.

In conclusion, EIB's approach to retail investors in the Union is already well developed and suitably supportive of its objectives as a ‘policy driven public bank’. However, this needs to be seen in the context of the leading role played by institutional investors in the debt capital markets in Europe. Nonetheless, EIB continues to explore opportunities for further sustainable development of this strategy, taking account of fast evolving market conditions.