WRITTEN QUESTION E-1628/99 by Antonio Tajani (PPE-DE), Francesco Fiori (PPE-DE), Giuseppe Gargani (PPE-DE), Stefano Zappalà (PPE-DE), Raffaele Fitto (PPE-DE), Guido Viceconte (PPE-DE) and Guido Podestà (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Canal Plus-ENEL agreement: entry of the largest public electricity group into the world of digital television.
Date: 1999-09-15
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: communications industry, shareholding

1.8.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 219 E/13

Priorities for a third tranche of
Commission and UNMIK. Main priorities include public administration,
development.

funding under 1999 programme have been identified between the
infrastructure and economic

(2000/C 219 E/017)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1628/99

by Antonio Tajani (PPE-DE), Francesco Fiori (PPE-DE),
Giuseppe Gargani (PPE-DE), Stefano Zappal(cid:224) (PPE-DE), Raffaele Fitto (PPE-DE),
Guido Viceconte (PPE-DE) and Guido Podest(cid:224) (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(15 September 1999)

Subject: Canal Plus-ENEL agreement: entry of the largest public electricity group into the world of digital

television

In the context of the Canal Plus-ENEL agreement, ENEL, the Italian electricity board, has subscribed to a
30 % share in Telepiø, involving a disbursement of some 900 billion lire. At the same time, ENEL has
increased its charges so that each family now has to pay over a million lire more per year.

What is the Commission(cid:146)s view of the entry of the largest public electricity group into the world of digital
television?

Can the Commission ascertain the grounds for such a decision, the criteria adopted and the reasons for not
investing capital in other economic sectors?

Does it consider it acceptable for a state-owned enterprise to invest public capital in a venture whose
prospects and financial situation are still uncertain, creating an image and awareness among the European
public that public funds are being appropriated for an investment that is risky to say the least?

Does it believe that the simultaneous increase in electricity charges to offset expenditure that is totally
unrelated to the energy sector is justifiable?

Can the Commission check whether similar cases have arisen in other EU Member States?

Lastly, can the Commission assess whether the Canal Plus-ENEL affair can be considered from a market
viewpoint or whether it impedes free competition? Can it also ascertain whether there are limits to the
financial activity of a state-owned enterprise in a free market, especially alongside another state-owned
enterprise, RAI TV?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(18 October 1999)

The Commission, under Article 295 (ex-Article 222) of the EC Treaty, is not competent to assess the
choices of a Member State regarding the ownership of undertakings. Therefore, it is not competent to
assess the industrial logic of the investment decisions adopted by public or private companies, nor possible
diversification strategies chosen by them.

Under state aid rules, no state aid can be detected when investments are made in circumstances that would
be acceptable for a private investor operating under normal market economy conditions, i.e. when the
expected return on the investment is comparable with the one a private investor operating in market
economy would have required, taking into account the risk of the investment itself. The Commission has
requested the Italian authorities to provide preliminary information on ENEL(cid:146)s acquisition of Telepiø, in
order to assess the possible presence of State aid.

In particular, the Commission will ensure that ENEL(cid:146)s investment in Telepiø does not benefit from cross-
subsidies deriving from the reserved activities of ENEL in the electricity business.

C 219 E/14

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

1.8.2000

As to the possibility that similar situations exist in other Member States, the Commission recalls what it
said above about Article 295 of the EC Treaty. In so far as competition rules are not infringed, Member
States and public undertakings have full competence to make investments in economic activities.

(2000/C 219 E/018)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1635/99

by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(15 September 1999)

Subject: Calf export ban

Is the Commission aware that since the end of July the UK Government has stopped funding the calf
processing scheme?

The scheme enabled calves which had been exported before the introduction of the EU calf export ban to
be paid for and disposed of at a fixed price. Now that this funding has been stopped, calves have been
making just £1.00 each at market (cid:129) less than it costs to take them there. Dead calves have been dumped
in public, and farmers are being forced into the indignity of shooting their own animals.

Is the Commission considering lifting the calf export ban? If not, what is the likelihood of there being a
resumption of funding for the calf processing scheme?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(19 October 1999)

Indeed, the United Kingdom authorities have notified the Commission that the United Kingdom stopped
applying the optional calf processing aid scheme (CPAS) beyond the end of July 1999. This aid, created
under the 1992 beef reform and financed by Community funds, is no longer foreseen once the new beef
reform comes into application (as from January 2000).

So far, the Commission has not proposed to lift the ban on the export of live bovine animals from the
United Kingdom. Live animals would pose a greater risk to public and animal health than meat, since not
all Member States have a similar level of protection in place at slaughter to that operating in the United
Kingdom i.e. removal of specified risk materials and rules for the treatment of animal waste.

Until the end of December 1999, the British government is at liberty to reactivate this premium of its own
accord, at the level provided for by the relevant Commission Regulation (EC) No 2604/98 of 3 December
1998 amending Regulation (EEC) No 3886/92 laying down detailed rules for the application of the
premium schemes provided for in Council Regulation (EEC) No 805/68 on the common organisation of
the market in beef and veal and repealing Regulations (EEC) No 1244/82 and (EEC) No 714/89 (1), or at
another rate to be decided by the Commission. It is also worth noting that, as from the year 2000, UK has
received a supplementary special beef premium ceiling of 100 000 premium rights until such time as
exportation reopens for live animals under six months of age.

(1) OJ L 328, 4.12.1998.