WRITTEN QUESTION P-2438/99 by W.G. van Velzen (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Consequences of the rejection of the French Electricity Bill for the internal market.
Date: 1999-12-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: France, electrical industry, liberalisation of the market, national implementing measure, national parliament, public service, single market

C 219 E/162

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

1.8.2000

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(28 January 2000)

The Commission takes the view that Directive 95/46/EC of 24 October 1995 on the protection of
individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (1), to
which the Honourable Member refers, is of key importance to the development of electronic commerce.

The Directive is designed to enable personal data to move freely between Member States whilst ensuring
throughout the Community a high level of protection for individuals(cid:146) fundamental rights, including their
right to privacy. Such protection is necessary if consumers are to have confidence in the use of on-line
services and if electronic commerce is to expand accordingly.

The Commission is therefore keeping a close watch on the transposal of the Directive into national
legislation. As transposal has not yet been completed in several Member States, the Commission has
initiated proceedings against them for failure to meet their Community obligations.

As things stand,
the Commission does not have any information on the disparities to which the
Honourable Member refers. Such disparities may arise from the fact that the Directive has not been
transposed.

If the margin for manoeuvre which the Directive leaves to Member States, particularly as regards the
extension of protection to corporate data as referred to by the Honourable Member, were to present
obstacles to the proper operation of the internal market, the Commission would not fail to draw the
necessary consequences.

(1) OJ L 281, 23.11.1999.

(2000/C 219 E/206)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2438/99

by W.G. van Velzen (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(13 December 1999)

Subject: Consequences of the rejection of the French Electricity Bill for the internal market

After the French National Assembly had passed the Electricity Bill at first reading on 2 March 1999, the
Senate rejected it on Thursday, 18 November 1999. Formally, the European electricity directive ought to
have been transposed into national law as of 18 February 1999.

In view of the Commission(cid:146)s reply to previous questions by the undersigned, what implications is the

1.
rejection of the legislation likely to have for the liberalisation of the European electricity market?

2.
The rejection of the Electricity Bill in France will distort the internal market for electricity in the
European Union. Bearing in mind, inter alia, that the European directive ought to have been transposed
into national
law by 18 February, and that France is the only EU Member State which has not yet
complied with this requirement, legal proceedings against France would be appropriate. However, such
proceedings are likely to be protracted, and will not, therefore, remedy the situation in the near future.
What will the Commission do in the short term to prevent distortion of the internal market for electricity?

3.
Has the French Government informed the Commission of the situation, and has the Commission
been informed how the French Government intends to prevent any obstacles to the internal market as
soon as possible and what practical measures the French Government intends to take, in consultation with
the Commission, to reduce the distortion of the internal market to a minimum?

1.8.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 219 E/163

4. What countermeasures by EU Member States will the Commission allow in order to implement the
reciprocity clause?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(13 January 2000)

The Commission regrets the postponement of the adoption of the bill on the modernisation and
1.
the public electricity service, which was designed to transpose into French law
development of
Directive 92/96/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 19 December 1996 (1) concerning common
rules for the internal market in electricity and to guarantee the right of the electricity producers of the
other Member States to supply potentially eligible French consumers and the right of French consumers to
freedom of choice of supplier.

2.
Following the failure of the Joint Committee of the French Senate and National Assembly of
18 November 1999, on 24 November 1999 the Commission sent France a letter formally requiring it to
submit its comments within 15 days and on 23 December 1999 it sent France a reasoned opinion
pursuant to Article 226 (ex-Article 169) of the EC Treaty.

On 2 December 1999, the French Energy Minister (SecrØtaire d(cid:146)Etat) informed the Council meeting on
energy that the French Government had taken steps to ensure that the bill is adopted in February 2000.

Following an initiative from ElectricitØ de France and in agreement with the French Government,
3.
industrial consumers that use more than 100 GWh (i.e. 22 % of the market) benefit from access to the
network on the basis of public tariffs for the transmission of any electricity purchased from suppliers in
other Member States.

4.
It is up to the Member States to take the decision to apply the balance clause of Article 19(5) of
Directive 96/92/EC. The Commission will ensure that it is correctly applied and, in particular, that the
market of the Member States concerned remains open to all potential suppliers for eligible consumers that
use more than 100 GWh.

(1) OJ L 27, 30.1.1997.

(2000/C 219 E/207)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2440/99

by Giles Chichester (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(13 December 1999)

Subject: Closure of Barseb(cid:228)ck nuclear power plant by Swedish Government

The Swedish Government has decided to close down by the end of November 1999 one of the country(cid:146)s
twelve nuclear reactors at the Barseb(cid:228)ck nuclear power station close to Copenhagen. The reactor is one of
the two privately owned power plants, the other ten are owned by the Swedish Government, through the
State Power Board. The Government has not undertaken an environmental impact assessment as to the
consequences of the closure of the reactor nor has it made any commitment for compensation to the
owners and employees.

The situation gives rise to important questions, which the European Commission should address as a
matter of urgency in view of the planned closure date:

1.

2.

From a competition aspect, can the Commission state whether the Swedish Government(cid:146)s decision to
close one of the two privately owned rectors and not one of the ten state-owned plants, is a distortion
of EU legislation?

Is the Commission satisfied that a full Environmental Impact Assessment has been correctly applied in
this case and, if not, should not the closure date be cancelled immediately.

3. Why has the European Commission not already taken measures in this case when the Swedish
Supreme Administrative Court, the final court of appeal, upheld the Government(cid:146)s decision but failed
to request a preliminary ruling from the European Court of Justice?