WRITTEN QUESTION E-2125/99 by Nelly Maes (Verts/ALE) and Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Council. Financial aid to the European oil industry.
Date: 1999-11-29
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: OPEC, economic support, energy crisis, environmental impact, environmental protection, greenhouse gas, petroleum policy

C 219 E/96

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

1.8.2000

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(17 December 1999)

The fact that airlines often charge less for their cheapest return tickets than they do for a standard fare
single ticket is not contrary to Community rules on pricing as set out in Council Regulation (EEC)
No 2409/92 of 23 July 1992 on fares and rates for air services (1). Under that Regulation, airlines have the
freedom to set both the level and structure of their fares, thereby allowing them to react swiftly to the
market. This has lead to more vigorous competition and, in particular, to lower leisure fares on many
routes. Most airlines offer their lowest fares in the form of return tickets only, because it would be simply
uneconomic to split them and sell them for half the price as single tickets. Often, these leisure tickets
represent good value, even if only one half is used.

The benefit of Regulation (EEC) No 2409/92, however, is that it permits airlines to react constantly in
order to compete with rivals. A number of the new low-cost carriers are now offering very low single fares
and transparent pricing structures based on the cost of each leg of the flight. This shows that airlines are
capable of reacting to their customers and it is important to preserve their flexibility to do so.

Taking account of the benefits of giving airlines the flexibility to set fares and rates in reaction to the
market, the Commission has no plans to introduce any additional restrictions or requirements on airlines
to address the issue of single tickets.

(1) OJ L 240, 24.8.1992.

(2000/C 219 E/124)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2125/99

by Nelly Maes (Verts/ALE) and Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Council

Subject: Financial aid to the European oil industry

(29 November 1999)

There is considerable movement in the oil sector: large companies are merging, OPEC meetings can lead to
a rise in the price of crude oil and there are regular press reports of new oil fields. The crisis atmosphere of
1973 seems definitely to be a thing of the past.

In the last two decades the Commission(cid:146)s energy policy has been increasingly concentrated on three
aspects:

(a) adequate energy supplies;

(b) environmental friendliness, and

(c)

consolidating a competitive position.

Following the 1973 oil crisis did the Council draw up financial support measures for the European

1.
oil industry?

2.

If not, has the Council given the sector support in any other form? What initiatives were involved?

If the Council did draw up support measures, what financial aid has been given to the European oil

3.
industry since 1973 (broken down by programmes and companies)?

4. What are the Council(cid:146)s reasons for such financial aid to the European oil industry?

Does the Council believe that financial aid to the oil

5.
prevent CO2 emissions?

industry is compatible with measures to

1.8.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 219 E/97

Reply

(31 January 2000)

The Council is aware of the heavy dependency of the Community on hydrocarbon fuels and believes that
there is a need for vigilance in both the short and the long term.

A significant part of Community actions in this context is contained in programmes which aim at
contributing to the achievement of the priority goals of energy policy: security of supply, competitiveness
and protection of the environment. Such programmes complement national energy policies through
Community actions proposed by the Commission.

Since 1975, financial aid has been granted to the hydrocarbons sector mainly in the context of the
in order to achieve safe, clean and efficient exploitation of hydrocarbons. With
Thermie Programme,
regard to the detail of such support measures, the Honourable Members are invited to address their
question to the Commission which is responsible for the implementation and management of these
programmes.

The Council is fully aware that the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions requires adequate responses in
the energy sector. It is why in its conclusions on climate change of May 1998 (1), it noted the need for a
sustained commitment to energy efficiency and energy saving and for the reduction of the environmental
impact of the use of energy sources with high carbon content.

(1) Doc. 8357/98 Presse 136.

(2000/C 219 E/125)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2132/99

by Olivier Dupuis (TDI) to the Commission

(24 November 1999)

Subject: The situation in Saudi Arabia

International organisations and the reports adopted by the United Nations Commission on Human Rights
(E/CN.4/1998/44, paragraphs 19 and 21; E/CN.4/1998/43, paragraphs 13 and 405; E/CN.4/1998/68,
paragraphs 89 and 92) have provided substantial information indicating a very serious situation with
regard to human rights and fundamental freedoms in Saudi Arabia.

The UN Commission on Human Rights has condemned the use of arbitrary detention, torture, forced or
involuntary disappearances, and extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions by the Saudi authorities (for
example, those executed in 1997 included over 70 foreign nationals and the death penalty is carried out
even against people who were minors at the time they committed the offence). The authorities in Riyadh
routinely exercise very heavy repression against political opponents (total ban on political parties) and
the press to total control. Arrests for expressing certain views are
religious minorities and subject
increasing. Amputation as a punishment is still widely practised.

What is the Commission(cid:146)s position on the situation in Saudi Arabia?

What action has the Commission taken or does it intend to take to make the Saudi authorities show at
least minimum respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(8 December 1999)

The human rights situation in Saudi Arabia does indeed give cause for concern. There is no specific
agreement between the Community and Saudi Arabia which would provide the framework for direct
exchange of views and dialogue. A regular political dialogue has been established between the Community
and the Gulf Cooperation Council
the Union(cid:146)s cooperation
agreement with the GCC countries, which include the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Saudi Arabia, Bahrain,
Qatar, Oman, and Kuwait.

(GCC) countries within the context of