WRITTEN QUESTION E-3240/00

by Gabriele Stauner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(20 October 2000)

Subject: Fléchard firm's involvement in adulterated butter fraud

On 6 July 2000 the Commission issued a press release from its Anti-Fraud Office OLAF concerning a case of fraud involving adulterated butter.

The above press release reports that, over a period of several years, members of a Camorra clan operating in the Naples area had been producing adulterated butter on a large scale and marketing it with the help of Italian, French and Belgian firms.

The adulterated butter was composed of almost one third chemical additives, vegetable fat, beef tallow and other substances normally intended for use in cosmetics. In all, around 16 000 tonnes of adulterated butter were produced between 1997 and 1999.

Some of the adulterated butter was exported to third countries, with export refunds being paid from the Community budget. Some was used in baking, again receiving aid from the Community budget.

1. Can the Commission confirm that information from the competent judicial authorities in France and Italy shows that the Fléchard firm played a key role in the marketing of adulterated butter?

2. Is it true that the damage to the Community budget arising from this butter fraud can be expected to amount to at least 45 million?

3. What consequences has this had for Fléchard?

(a) Was the firm placed on the blacklist (Regulation No 1469/95)?

(b) Were all payments to the firm from the Community budget halted? If so, when? If not, why not?

(c) Has the firm been asked to repay export refunds or other forms of aid wrongly paid to it? If so, when and what amount? If not, why not?

4. Does the Commission stand by its position (letter of 5 July 2000 from Commissioner Schreyer/D(2000)408) that it cannot provide any information on the payments made to Fléchard from the Community budget?

5. Does the Commission not consider full information to be necessary in view of the severity of the allegations made against the above firm?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-3240/00 and P-3478/00 given by Mrs Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(14 December 2000)

Investigations into adulterated butter are being conducted by the authorities of the Member States, in cooperation with the European Anti-Fraud Office

(OLAF). No final conclusions have yet been drawn as to whether the firms under investigation were involved in fraud. It is up to OLAF to keep Parliament informed of operational developments in its regular contacts with the institutions pursuant to Article 12(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1073/1999 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 May 1999 concerning OLAF investigations(1).

The Commission would point out that only the authorities responsible in the Member States may take measures against a firm deemed to be unreliable (including suspension of the payment of amounts due for current operations) and enter that firm's name on the black list under Council Regulation (EC) No 1469/95 of 22 June 1995 on measures to be taken with regard to certain beneficiaries of operations financed by the EAGGF Guarantee Section and Commission Regulation No 745/96 of 24 April 1996 laying down detailed implementing rules(2). OLAF receives the relevant reports from the Member States.

The Commission would stress that the aid in question constitutes expenditure managed directly by the Member States, whose task it is to reclaim any sums unduly paid. At this stage, OLAF reports that no steps have yet been taken at national level to recover the aid. First, the exact quantities of ineligible products and their final destination (whether covered by aid or not) must be determined. For the same reason the loss to the Community budget has not been quantified.

In the letter referred to by the Honourable Member, the Commission pointed out that it had no access to the detailed information held by the national payment agencies which fell outside the scope of its inspection powers and that under the Community rules such information had to be treated in confidence. In particular, data on individual firms might be covered by business secrecy. Here the Commission would also refer to the provisions on protecting the confidentiality of personal data, as laid down in Article 8 of Regulation 1073/1999.

The Commission will not fail to inform Parliament of the action taken on the investigations under way, in accordance with existing arrangements.

(1) OJ L 136, 31.5.1999.

(2) OJ L 145, 29.6.1995; OJ L 102, 25.4.1996.