WRITTEN QUESTION E-2775/00

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(1 September 2000)

Subject: Restoration of order at the Italian State Printing Works, Stationery Office, and Mint

Over the past seven years in Italy there have been scores of press reports and questions tabled in Parliament by representatives of the most diverse political groups concerning the situation at the State Printing Works, Stationery Office, and Mint (IPZS), which has been reduced to such straits as to be teetering on the brink of bankruptcy after amassing losses amounting to hundreds of billions of lire, although these did not come to light until they were revealed by the 1997 balance sheet, since the balance sheets before that date invariably showed profits fluctuating on either side of the four billion lire mark.

Mr Roberto Tribuni, who served on the board of directors of the State Printing Works between July 1993 and March 1996, informed not only the Press, the judicial authorities, and Parliament, but also the Ministry of the Treasury about a number of administrative irregularities and probable criminal offences that had given him serious cause to doubt whether the balance sheets were truthful. For example, Mr Tribuni maintained that, contrary to what was expressly stipulated in Law 559/66, which at that time regulated operations at the State Printing Works, expenditure above ITL 200 million was never subject to specific decisions. In addition, he claimed that forged State bonds were in circulation, which, however, had been produced using the same inks, the same engravings, and the same watermarked paper (manufactured by none other than the State Printing Works) as the Printing Works used to produce the genuine bonds, and that investigators had recovered some of the fakes from certain banks. He also alleged that problems had arisen in connection with certain associated companies which supplied the Mint with coining equipment. The price charged for an Italian coin ranged from ITL 35 to ITL 350, compared with the ITL 18 per coin charged to the Ukrainian Government.

At present, the Italian Government is in the process of paying the IPZS no less than ITL 1 200 billion for 7,2 billion coins, the production of which has fallen a long way behind schedule.

In the light of the foregoing:

1. Can the Commission say whether investigations have been completed regarding the decision of the Italian Government to grant ITL 1 600 billion over a 20-year period to enable the IPZS to offset the losses?

2. What does it think about the sum which the Italian Government intends to pay the Mint for making the euro coins, bearing in mind, given the delay in the work, that the money could be used to save the IPZS from insolvency?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(28 September 2000)

As anticipated in its previous replies to the Honourable Member, the Commission decided, on 28 October 1998, to initiate the procedure provided in Article 88 (ex Article 93), paragraph 2 of the EC Treaty, with respect to two capital increases in favour of Cartiere Miliani di Fabriano, controlled by Poligrafico, and the exclusive contracts granted to Poligrafico for the provision of products and services to the State.

Following the granting to Istituto Poligrafico of additional measures provided by Article 22 of the 1999 budget law, the Commission decided, on 3 May 2000, to extend the Article 88 procedure. This decision was communicated to the Italian government by letter of 5 July 2000.

At this state, the Commission is waiting for the observations of the Italian government and for possible comments from interested parties. Once such comments are received, the Commission will be in a position to terminate the investigation procedure.

As regards the compensation received by Poligrafico for the products and services sold to the State, the Commission, during the course of the procedure, has found no evidence of over-compensation by the State for such services.

Finally, as regards the compensation received by Poligrafico for the coinage of Euro coins, the Commission is not competent to examine its proportionality, this service being excluded from the Community provisions on public tenders.

The Commission is not competent to evaluate the possible existence of facts relevant under the criminal law, such as those reported by the Honourable Member, concerning the previous managers of the Istituto and the possible existence of falsified State bonds.