WRITTEN QUESTION E-1682/99 by Christos Zacharakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Strengthening European policy on civil defence.
Date: 1999-09-22
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU programme, European cooperation, action programme, civil defence, environmental protection

C 170 E/74

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.6.2000

The collecting and sorting of old clothes is affected by overcapacity in the Federal Republic of Germany.
Assistance for the market leader in this sector is likely to lead to predatory practices. It also gives rise to
the possibility that the market leader could take a dominant market position.

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(26 October 1999)

At the end of 1998 the Commission(cid:146)s attention was drawn to possible unlawful state aid in the context of
the construction of a plant for the recycling of textiles which was carried out by the SOEX group in the
Bitterfeld industrial park in Sachsen-Anhalt. Accordingly, the Commission wrote to the German authorities
and requested information on whether the firm had received state aid in favour of its investment and if so,
what amount and on which legal basis.

The German authorities replied by letter of 16 November 1998 and confirmed that the firm had invested
DM 76,037 million creating employment for 417 people, and had received state aid. By decision of the
Land Sachsen- Anhalt of 7 November 1996, the firm was awarded an investment grant consisting of both
national and Community funds totalling DM 23,419 million. The aid share related to the overall
investment thus amounted to 32,48 %.

The German authorities pointed out that the investment aid was awarded in full respect of the provisions
contained in the 25th framework plan of the (cid:145)Gemeinschaftsaufgabe regionale Wirtschaftsstruktur(cid:146) which is
the relevant regional aid scheme for Germany notified to and approved by the Commission. Therefore, an
individual notification was not necessary. The scheme even authorised aid for new investment up to 35 %
of the overall investment cost. In addition, the project was approved by the Commission on 11 April 1997
for co-financing by the Commission under the European regional development fund (ERDF)
in the
framework of the operational programme of the Land Sachsen- Anhalt 1994-1999.

The Commission examined the German authorities(cid:146) information and concluded that, on the basis of the
information available, there was no breach of the Community rules on state aid. The aid was granted on
the basis of an approved aid scheme concerning new investment in a depressed area. The aid ceilings
permitted by that scheme were respected.

In this context, it has to be pointed out that the Commission, in the past, did not generally examine
individual state aid for new investment projects in depressed areas. Consequently, it neither could assess
the impact of the new investment on the capacities in the respective industrial sector. An exemption
existed only for the so-called sensitive sectors such as shipbuilding, car and synthetic fibres industry for
which there are specific rules regarding the control of state aid. However, a change occurred with the new
multisectoral regional framework for large investment projects which entered into force on 1 September
1998. Following the rules of this framework, state aid in favour of large investment projects has to be
notified individually if certain thresholds in investment sums or state aid payments are exceeded. In the
framework of the individual assessment, the Commission now is in a better position to investigate the
impact of an investment on the capacities within the relevant product market and to take this impact into
account when determining the maximum allowed aid intensity.

(2000/C 170 E/083)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1682/99

by Christos Zacharakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(22 September 1999)

Subject: Strengthening European policy on civil defence

In view of the tragic outcome of the recent earthquakes in Greece which demonstrated the need for a
strong European policy for dealing with disasters (civil protection), and as the Commission Directorate-
General concerned, DG XI, has given low priority to this policy.

20.6.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 170 E/75

Will the Commission state:

1. How it reconciles the low priority ascribed to civil protection with the statement by Mr Prodi on

4 May on strengthening security policy in the EU?

2. What action it intends to take to strengthen this European policy on civil protection and establish

satisfactory cooperation and exchanges of experience between the Member States?

Answer given by Mrs Wallstr(cid:246)m on behalf of the Commission

(18 October 1999)

Civil protection is not covered by the policies intended to create a free, safe and just area within the

1.
Union.

The Commission has put to the Council a second programme of Community action on civil
2.
protection spanning 1 January 2000-2031 December 2004 (1). In line with the principles of subsidiarity
and proportionality that programme is intended to support and supplement the efforts made by the
Member States to protect individual persons, the environment and property in the event of natural or
technological disasters.

(1) COM(98) 768 final (cid:129) OJ C 28, 3.2.1999 and amended proposal COM(1999) 400 final.

(2000/C 170 E/084)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1683/99

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(22 September 1999)

Subject: School milk scheme

Can the Commission indicate whether it has plans to abolish or cut the subsidised school milk scheme?
This scheme is of particular benefit to children in poorer areas, notably as a source of calcium, and to local
milk producers.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(13 October 1999)

The Commission can confirm that it has initiated a discussion about the role of the Community in the
distribution of milk at schools and its financial participation in particular. The background for this
initiative is the need for a regular critical examination of support measures that imply considerable
budgetary charges for the Community. In the case of the Community school milk programme, expenditure
amounts to more than € 100 million.

is against

this background that

It
the Commission contracted an external evaluation study, whose
conclusions are rather critical as to the cost-effectiveness of the measure. In the meantime, the conclusions
of this study have been the subject of further discussions and consultations.

On the basis of these reflections, the Commission will consider submitting a legislative proposal on the
future of the scheme, to be decided by the Council in consultation with the Parliament.