WRITTEN QUESTION E-2051/99 by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Activities of the Astano shipyards, in Galicia.
Date: 1999-11-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EC Regulation, Galicia, State aid, derogation from EU law, industrial restructuring, privatisation, production capacity, shipbuilding

20.6.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 170 E/141

According to child nutrition specialists milk is an essential food for child development. The distribution of
milk in schools is, moreover, still useful today in reaching certain sectors of the population who do not
enjoy a balanced diet.

This plan is disturbing in terms of both agriculture and public health.

As the Agriculture Council on 14 and 15 June 1999 took the view that milk consumption should be
encouraged because of its nutritional value,
in particular for children and young people, why is the
Commission taking a decision that runs counter to the Council(cid:146)s opinion?

At a time when public health has just been given the status of a horizontal Community policy under the
Treaty of Amsterdam, how can the Commission risk endangering the health of European children who
benefit from this nutritional supplement in schools?

Can the Commission therefore deny the information that has been published and reassure the citizens of
Europe?

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-2029/99 and E-2054/99
given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(9 December 1999)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its
findings as soon as possible.

(2000/C 170 E/171)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2036/99

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(3 November 1999)

Subject: Knorr Bremse and European funding

Knorr Bremse has announced several hundred redundancies in Kingswood, Bristol (UK), in order to transfer
work to its factories in France, Italy or Germany and Hungary.

Can the Commission say whether any financial assistance of any kind has been asked for by this company
or given to this company for job creation in France, Italy or Germany or through TACIS and PHARE
programmes in Hungary?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(26 November 1999)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its
findings as soon as possible.

(2000/C 170 E/172)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2051/99

by Camilo Nogueira RomÆn (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

Subject: Activities of the Astano shipyards, in Galicia

(3 November 1999)

the Spanish
In its reply to a question which I
Government(cid:146)s privatisation plans on the prohibition on shipbuilding activities applying to the Astano
shipyards, the Commission stated that (cid:145)any change of ownership of Astano would have no effect on the
limitations placed on its activities(cid:146).

tabled (E-1432/99 (1)) about

the repercussions of

C 170 E/142

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.6.2000

Will the Commission explain the legal and political justification for such a statement, given that the reason
for the prohibition was that the publicly-owned Spanish shipyards continued to benefit from State aids?

(1) OJ C 27 E, 29.1.2000, p. 66.

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(30 November 1999)

The Commission has, in its reply given to the Honourable Member(cid:146)s Written Question E-1432/99 (1), to
which the Honourable Member refers, explained the conditions attached to restucturing aid for the
publicly-owned shipyards in Spain. However it may be helpful if the Commission tries further to clarify
the basis for the current restrictions on Astano(cid:146)s activities.

In the preamble to Council Regulation (EC) 1013/97 of 2 June 1997 on aid to certain shipyards under
restructuring (2), allowing a derogation from the state aid rules laid down in Council Directive 90/0684/
EEC of 21 December 1990 on aid to shipbuilding (3) to enable a further and final restructuring of the
publicly-owned yards in Spain, it is clearly stated that proposed capacity reductions under their restructur-
ing plan will be supplemented by the continued non-reopening to shipbuilding of the Astano yard. In the
absence of any indications in the Regulation to the contrary, it is evident that this restriction is not limited
in time and applies to the yard as such irrespective of its ownership. This is underlined by the fact that the
same paragraph of the preamble to the Regulation in contrast refers to the Astander yard (cid:145)not carrying out
ship conversions as long as it remains in public ownership(cid:146). It was only on the basis of these and the other
conditions laid down in the Regulation that the Council was able to agree to the derogation.

These conditions were reiterated in the Commission(cid:146)s final decision (4) approving the restructuring aid
package, paragraphs 29 and 35 of which refer to the position of Astano.

As was explained in the Commission(cid:146)s reply to the Honourable Member(cid:146)s previous question, the limits on
the yards(cid:146) shipbuilding production capability were a necessary counterpart for the substantial amount of
aids approved in order to minimise the possible distortions to intra-Community competition.

(1) OJ C 27 E, 29.1.2000, p. 66.
(2) OJ L 148, 6.6.1997.
(3) OJ L 380, 31.12.1990.
(4) OJ C 354, 21.11.1997.

(2000/C 170 E/173)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2070/99

by Concepci(cid:243) Ferrer (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(5 November 1999)

Subject: Situation in the European distribution sector following the merger of Promodes and Carrefour

With reference to the replies furnished by the Commission when it appeared before the European
Parliament on 1 September 1999 in order to answer a question from Mr Garc(cid:237)a-Margallo, MEP, on
company mergers within the distribution sector, and whereas the Promodes-Carrefour merger will create
serious problems in regions such as Haute-Savoie, where the giant company will control 86 % of the
market, and Catalonia, where the group created by the merger will operate approximately 70 % of the
region(cid:146)s supermarkets, and in view of the Europe-wide scope of such operations (the group runs major
supermarket chains throughout the EU), could the Commission say what stage has been reached in the
action it is taking with regard to this matter?