WRITTEN QUESTION E-1990/01

by Hans Modrow (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(6 July 2001)

Subject: ELF Aquitaine/Leuna

Proceedings have been brought against senior employees of ELF before a court in Paris; in some cases heavy fines were imposed as a result. One of the transactions which played in part in the case was the sale of a business in the territory of the former GDR.

Can the Commission answer the following:

1. What is known about the sale of the former Leuna works to ELF? Was it assisted by EU funding intended for the Objective 1 territory of the Federal Republic of Germany?

2. How did the Commission institutions monitor the sale of the Leuna works? Did the court proceedings reveal any shortcomings in this respect?

3. What does the Commission know about favours to parties and prominent individuals in connection with the sale of the Leuna works to ELF?

4. Will the Commission draw conclusions from the proceedings in Paris, and if so, what?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(19 September 2001)

The privatisation and the restructuring of the Zeitz/Leuna refineries and the Minol station network were initially approved by the Commission's decision of 24 June 1993. Later Commission's inquiries into this case only relate to the investment costs of the new refinery near Leuna. The Commission is presently investigating whether the construction costs of the refinery were inflated (Case C 47/97). In the light of several national judicial and parliamentary enquiries currently underway in various European states, the Commission is not in a position to make final conclusions in this latter case.

In its decision of 1993 authorising the aid measures in favour of the privatisation and the restructuring, the Commission examined also the purchase offers of the parties interested in taking over Leuna and Minol. Offers were presented on the basis of an open call for tender prepared by Goldman Sachs on behalf of the German Government.

Following the information received by the responsible Ministry for Economic Affairs and Technology in Sachsen-Anhalt, the construction of the petrol refining factory by the Mitteldeutsche Erdöl-Raffinerie GmbH (MIDER) was not co-financed under objective 1 of the European regional development fund.

The Commission concluded in its 1993 State aid decision that the purchase offer of the consortium that constituted at the time of ELF Aquitaine, Thyssen Handel Berlin GmbH and Deutsche SB-Kauf AG was the best to implement the privatisation.

The examination by the Commission was done on the basis of the information provided by the German Government in the notification of the aid measures. Member States are required under Article 10 of the EC Treaty to take all the appropriate measures to ensure fulfilment of the Treaty rules and to abstain from any measure which could jeopardise the attainment of the objectives of this Treaty, including the provisions on State aid.

The Commission has no information from the legal proceedings indicating that the information notified pursuant to Article 88(3) of the EC Treaty was not in accordance with Article 10.

The Commission is aware of allegations about favours to parties and prominent individuals in connection with the sale of the Leuna works. The examination of such issues is not of the Commission's competence.

It should be noted that judiciary proceedings are the responsibility of the Member States. The Commission will study with interest any information arising from such proceedings in order to see whether it has to draw any conclusions.