WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2619/97 by Pat GALLAGHER to the Commission. Competitiveness Advisory Group
Date: 1997-07-18
Institutions: European Parliament, GALLAGHER PAT
Subjects: EU national, Ireland, competitiveness, self-employed person

11. 3. 98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 76/131

proceedings, the Commission is limited to assessing the evidence contained in the complaint. In the present case,
since facts reported in the complaint constituted evidence of injurious dumping, the Commission was obliged to
open a new proceeding.

(1)  OJ L 56, 6.3.1996.

(98/C 76/248)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2619/97

by Pat Gallagher (UPE) to the Commission

(18 July 1997)

Subject: Competitiveness Advisory Group

Can the Commission indicate

1.  The basis used for seeking nominations for the second Competitiveness Advisory Group (CAG),

2.  Whether Ireland(cid:146)s social partners or the Irish government were asked to submit a candidate, and

3.  Why there is no Irish participant on the Group?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(10 September 1997)

The competitiveness advisory group was established as an independent group of eminent personalities by the
Commission in February 1995 in line with a recommendation of the Essen European Council (December 1994).
At the end of its two-year mandate and due to its success, the Commission decided (February 1997) that its work
should be continued by appointing a new competitiveness advisory group. The decision was welcomed by the
Amsterdam European Council (June 1997).

Independence  is  an  essential  feature  of  the  group.  This  means,  in  particular,  that  each  member  is  invited  to
participate on a personal basis and not as a representative of a government or any other organisation. As a matter
of record, membership of the group has included so far nationals of 13 Member States. Mr Peter Cassel, general
secretary of the Irish Trade union congress, was a member of the first group for the entire duration of its mandate.

(98/C 76/249)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2634/97

by Roberto Mezzaroma (UPE) to the Commission

(22 July 1997)

Subject: Single market

Can the Commission say what point has been reached in the inquiry it is carrying out into the alleged abuse of a
dominant position on the manufacture tobacco market by the multinational Philip Morris and the Italian financial
authorities?

Has  the  inquiry  identified  the  mechanism  which  has  so  far  undermined  attempts  to  compete  with  the
multinational, which now seems to account for 55% of the Italian market? Is there total freedom and competition
in Italy, enabling  any European manufacturer to  sell  products without restrictions  being caused by  exclusive
sales outlets?

Finally, can the Commission say how long it will take to complete the investigations?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(4 September 1997)

The Commission has initiated proceedings, pursuant to Regulation No 17/62 implementing Articles 85 and 86 of
the EC Treaty (1), in order to ascertain whether certain practices pursued by the Amministrazione autonoma dei
monopoli  di  Stato  ((cid:145)AAMS(cid:146))  on  the  Italian  cigarette  market  constitute  abuse  of  a  dominant  position  under
Article 86 of the EC Treaty. The proceedings relate in particular to the obstacles created by the AAMS to market
access by foreign cigarettes.