WRITTEN QUESTION No. 417/97 by Ernesto CACCAVALE , Alessandro DANESIN , Giacomo LEOPARDI , Riccardo GAROSCI , Antonio TAJANI , Guido VICECONTE , Gian BONIPERTI , Franco MALERBA to the Commission. The privatization of the STET (the state-owned telephone company)
Date: 1997-02-13
Institutions: BONIPERTI, CACCAVALE, DANESIN, European Parliament, GAROSCI, LEOPARDI, MALERBA, TAJANI, VICECONTE
Subjects: Italy, Treasury, debt, privatisation, self-employed person, telecommunications













EUR-Lex - 91997E0417 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E0417

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 417/97 by Ernesto CACCAVALE , Alessandro DANESIN , Giacomo LEOPARDI , Riccardo GAROSCI , Antonio TAJANI , Guido VICECONTE , Gian BONIPERTI , Franco MALERBA to the Commission. The privatization of the STET (the state-owned telephone company)  


Official Journal C 319 , 18/10/1997 P. 0054 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0417/97 by Ernesto Caccavale (UPE), Alessandro Danesin (UPE), Giacomo Leopardi (UPE), Riccardo Garosci (UPE), Antonio Tajani (UPE), Guido Viceconte (UPE), Gian Boniperti (UPE) and Franco Malerba (UPE) to the Commission (13 February 1997)Subject: The privatization of the STET (the state-owned telephone company)As part of the process of reducing the debt of the IRI (the Italian state holding company), the Italian Government has promised the European Union that it will go ahead with the transfer and privatization of the STET, inter alia in the light of EU rules on competition and liberalization in the telecommunications sector.In the exercise of its democratic powers, the Italian Parliament recently rejected the decree law providing for the STET to be separated from the IRI as a preliminary step to subsequent privatization.However, the 1997 budget law provides for the company in question to be directly controlled by the state.Given that direct state control over the company is no longer subject to specific procedures or to any kind of time-limit, can this be deemed to be a form of state aid which is contrary to Article 90 of the EEC Treaty and Article 92 of the Treaty of Rome?Does the Commission consider that the agreement with the Italian Government on rescheduling the IRI's debt is still valid?Joint answer to Written Questions E-0291/97 and E-0417/97 given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission (20 March 1997)In the context of the undertaking given by Italy to reduce IRI's indebtedness ((OJ C 267, 2.10.1993. )), the transfer of STET to the Treasury satisfies the necessary conditions for complying with that undertaking and its extension.The Italian authorities have informed the Commission that the Italian Parliament's vote on the STET decree does not call into question the transfer of STET to the Treasury. That transfer has already taken place pursuant to Article 2(182) of the measure linked to the Finance Act which definitively approved the rules allowing purchase by the Treasury.The transaction does not involve state aid in so far as the Treasury is to purchase IRI's interest in STET at the market price, which is to be determined by independent consultants.The arrangements for transfer to the Treasury stipulate that the provisional minimum value of the transferred holding is fixed at LIT 14 530 billion, which may be adjusted upwards if the consultants arrive at a higher value.If the consultants' valuation were to prove lower than the above amount, the transaction would have to be regarded as involving elements of state aid that would have to be examined by the Commission in the light of Article 92 of the EC Treaty.The validity of the independent consultants' valuation could be confirmed, among other things, by the market price if the Treasury were to place the shares in STET on the market fairly soon after the valuation was made.