WRITTEN QUESTION E-1706/99 by Raffaele Costa (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Draft budget 2000 ‐ Staff and administrative expenditure in European Community delegations and decentralised expenditure on support staff and administration.
Date: 1999-09-29
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European official, European school, administrative expenditure (EU), allowances and expenses, draft budget (EU), financial control, pension scheme

8.8.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 225 E/9

(2000/C 225 E/011)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1706/99

by Raffaele Costa (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(29 September 1999)

Subject: Draft budget 2000 (cid:129) Staff and administrative expenditure in European Community delegations

and decentralised expenditure on support staff and administration

In 1998, total expenditure on staff and administration in EC delegations and decentralised expenditure on
support staff and administration was ECU 394 million (equivalent to ITL 763 billion).

Can the Commission explain why expenditure of EUR 433 million is envisaged for 2000, representing an
increase of some EUR 40 million (ITL 77 billion)?

Supplementary joint answer
to Written Questions E-1702/99, E-1703/99 and E-1706/99
given by Ms Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(20 January 2000)

The increase in appropriations, compared with the 1998 level of implementation, requested by the
Commission for Heading A-1 (Expenditure relating to persons working within the institution) in the
2000 preliminary draft budget is due to the following:

(cid:129) an increase of €

101 million in appropriations for the pensions of former officials of all the
institutions (Chapter A-19) because of an increase in the number of retired former officials, an
increase in the average cost of pensions as a result of the newly retired having completed a longer
period of service and an adjustment of the weightings in line with increases in the cost of living in the
various Member States;

(cid:129) the effect of

the salary adjustment adopted in December 1998, and those to be adopted

in December 1999 and December 2000, by the Council (in total + 5,3 %);

(cid:129) a 1,1 % increase in expenditure in Belgian francs compared with the 1999 budget, as a result of the

fixed exchange rate between the euro and the Belgian franc;

(cid:129) the impact of the net increase in the number of officials and temporary staff employed in 1998 (+270)

and 1999 (+103), with the effect of a (cid:145)full year(cid:146) (appropriations for six months the first year).

The appropriations under Title A-3 (expenditure resulting from special functions carried out by the
institution) requested by the Commission in the 2000 preliminary draft budget are up by 8,4 %
(€ 20,7 million) compared with the level of budget implementation in 1998 as a result of the following:

(cid:129) the 27,3 % increase in appropriations under Article A-327 for the European Schools (€ 26,6 million),
including an increase of about 20 % over 1999 due to the application of the regulations for seconded
staff, resulting in the payment of a severance grant for all teachers with nine years(cid:146) service at
1 September 2000, and the impact, over a full year, of the opening of the Brussels III School
in September 1999;

(cid:129) the 4 % reduction in the appropriations requested for the other headings under Title A-3 (€ 5,9 million)

compared with the 1998 implementation.

The growth in expenditure under Title A-6 (Staff and administrative expenditure of European Community
delegations) is basically due to the restructuring of the external service, i.e. the expansion of the network of
delegations to meet current policy priorities, which is being continued over 1999 and 2000 in accordance
with the guidelines set by the budgetary authority, endorsed by the Commission.

Compared with the 1998 budget implementation, the level of appropriations requested by the Commission
in the 2000 preliminary draft budget is up by 10,2 % (€ 21,2 million) because of the following:

(cid:129) a rise in the number of people employed in the delegations from 644 to 693 (+ 7,6 %) reflecting the
redeployments from headquarters intended to improve the management of Community programmes
of external actions;

C 225 E/10

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

8.8.2000

(cid:129) higher expenditure on immovable property due to rents being fixed in US dollars and to the

multiannual programme for the security and renovation of buildings;

(cid:129) costs related to the rotation of officials in delegations;

(cid:129) new staff training measures;

(cid:129) the information technology programme to ensure that tools in delegations are compatible with those

at headquarters.

The level of appropriations under Title A-7 (Decentralised expenditure on support staff and administration)
requested by the Commission in the 2000 preliminary draft budget broadly matches the 1999 level.

The 12,4 % increase (€ 23,2 million) increase as compared with the 1998 implementation is due to the
following:

(cid:129) the 1999 adjustment

(last revision in 1991) of daily subsistence allowances for officials and
subsistence allowances for national experts seconded to the Commission (impact over a full year:
€ 6,7 million);

(cid:129) the transfer, within the 1999 budget, of ancillary expenditure relating to conferences and congresses

from Part B to Part A (Title A-7) (€ 17 million), decided by Parliament.

(2000/C 225 E/012)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1713/99

by Jonas Sj(cid:246)stedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(29 September 1999)

Subject: Sweden(cid:146)s competitive disadvantage in egg production

Both carcass meal and colouring agents are allowed in egg production in Finland. The same substances are
banned in Sweden. Cages are also allowed to be smaller in Finland. Finnish producers, therefore, have
lower costs than their Swedish counterparts. Is it fair that Swedish producers should be at a competitive
disadvantage because they take greater account of consumers and animal welfare?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(1 December 1999)

The Commission is not aware of a general ban in Sweden on feeding any farmed livestock, including
laying hens, with mammalian meat-and-bone meal.

Since 1986 Sweden has banned the use of certain animal material (i.e. animals which have died of natural
causes or coming from parts of carcasses of slaughtered animals presenting pathological modifications) in
the manufacture of animal feed. This derogation from the Community legislation was negotiated in the Act
of Accession at the time of Sweden(cid:146)s accession. The Commission is now reflecting on the possibility to
introduce a similar ban in the Community.

According to the information received by the Commission, the use of substances for the colouring of eggs
in accordance with the provisions of Council Directive 70/524/EEC of 23 November 1970 concerning
additives in feedingstuffs (1), has been authorised in Sweden.

In relation to the protection of laying hens the Commission is very concerned about the welfare of the
animals and gives it a high priority.

Concerning the size of the cages and the legislation on the protection of animal welfare in Sweden,
Council Directive 88/166/EEC of 7th March 1988 complying with the judgement of the Court of justice in
Case 131/86, annulment of Council Directive 86/113/EEC of 25th March 1986 laying down minimum
standards for the protection of laying hens kept in battery cages (2) states in Article 1 that it (cid:145)lays down
minimum standards for the protection of laying hens kept in battery cages(cid:146). The same principle is stated by