WRITTEN QUESTION E-2675/99 by Theresa Villiers (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Commission policy on takeovers.
Date: 2000-01-12
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: company law, competence of the Member States, proposal (EU), shareholder, takeover bid

C 225 E/190

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

8.8.2000

(2000/C 225 E/212)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2671/99

by Klaus-Heiner Lehne (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Cards for EU citizens entering Italy

(12 January 2000)

On 15 November 1999 German tourists on a ferry from Tunis to Livorno (Italy) had to have orange cards
stamped. Otherwise, according to the Italian authorities, they would have been refused entry to Italy.
Customs officials said that without the stamp they would not have been allowed to leave the ship. Entry
into Italy was delayed as a result by several hours. The tourists regarded this as harassment pure and
simple.

Is there any reason why EU citizens have to present special entry permits for Italy?

If not, what action does the Commission intend to take?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(17 February 2000)

The Commission will make the necessary contacts with the Italian authorities in order to obtain all the
details on the facts reported by the Honourable Member. It will not fail to take such action as may be
necessary under the procedure provided for by Article 226 (former Article 169) of the EC Treaty.

(2000/C 225 E/213)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2675/99

by Theresa Villiers (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(12 January 2000)

Subject: Commission policy on takeovers

Following the announcement of the Vodaphone bid for Mannesmann, Commissioner Monti was quoted in
a British newspaper suggesting that the controversy this bid had provoked highlighted the necessity of
finding agreement on the proposed takeovers directive (the 13th company law directive concerning
takeover bids).

The British business community has opposed this proposed directive on the basis that it would impose
costly legal burdens on them and override the UK(cid:146)s Takeover Panel, which has a proven track record of
successfully dealing with takeover questions on a non-statutory basis.

How will the Commission(cid:146)s proposals resolve these issues and ensure that takeovers are policed effectively
at national or European level?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(17 February 2000)

The amended proposal for a thirteenth Directive of the Parliament and the Council on company law
concerning take over bids (1) aims at establishing equivalent minimum safeguards for the protection of
minority shareholders in the case of a transfer of corporate control.

The proposed directive requires Member States to designate one or more supervisory authorities which
must supervise the bid. Because of differences in legal tradition, the question to what extent recourse

8.8.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 225 E/191

against the decisions of a supervisory authority is possible before the courts is left to Member States. The
proposed directive does however contain guidance on how to police cross-border take over bids which
involve supervisory authorities in more than one Member State.

(1) OJ C 378, 13.12.1997.

(2000/C 225 E/214)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2681/99

by Luis Berenguer Fuster (PSE) to the Commission

(12 January 2000)

Subject: Statements by the Spanish government on the unresolved issue of state aid to the electricity sector

The Spanish government, and in particular the Minister for Industry and government spokesman,
Josep PiquØ, have stated on numerous occasions that the Commission is to adopt a decision on state aids
to the Spanish electricity sector in respect of the costs of transition to competition by the end of 1999.

Can the Commission confirm the Spanish government(cid:146)s assertions?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(8 February 2000)

In discussions between the Spanish Minister and the Member of
the Commission responsible for
competition policy the intention was indeed to reach a decision on this case before the end of 1999.
However, the search for an independent consultant and the complexity of the case made it impossible to
meet this target. The Commission still hopes to be able to adopt a decision shortly.

(2000/C 225 E/215)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2682/99

by Luis Berenguer Fuster (PSE) to the Commission

(12 January 2000)

Subject: Decision on an unresolved case concerning state aids

The Spanish press has published information taken from the Ministry for Industry(cid:146)s Bolet(cid:237)n de Energ(cid:237)a
ElØctrica (electricity newsletter), stating that electricity companies have already received a total of
PTA 387 223 m in the form of state aids. Spanish consumers are paying for this through higher electricity
bills.

In reply to an earlier question of mine, the Commission reported that it had not considered it appropriate
to rule that payment of the aid be suspended, given,
(cid:145)the absence of a pre-existing framework, the
complexity of the issue and discussions currently taking place(cid:146). Meanwhile, consumers continue to foot the
bill for what is in principle considered unlawful state aid, and companies have received approximately
30 % of the total amount, which will be difficult to recover, should a decision be made to that effect.

Does the Commission agree that the time has now come to rule that payments be suspended?