WRITTEN QUESTION E-0173/00 by Salvador Garriga Polledo (PPE-DE) to the Commission. EU cooperation to help Mexico pay off the bank rescue debt.
Date: 2000-01-31
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Mexico, banking system, cooperation policy, economic situation, financial aid, financial intervention, intervention policy, monetary crisis

21.11.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 330 E/97

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(27 March 2000)

The Spanish authorities promised the Commission that they would not authorise electricity companies to
transfer to third parties the right to receive aid to cover the (cid:145)costs of transition to competition(cid:146) (CTC) as
referred to in the sixth transitional provision of Act No 54/1997 before the Commission adopted a final
decision on the matter. So far no such transfer has been authorised by the Spanish authorities. Even if any
transfer had taken place, mechanisms exist in Spanish law to adjust the amounts of CTC to genuine past
costs arising from market variables. The Commission will adopt its decision on the CTC in accordance
with the principles laid down in its draft methodology, and in particular it will make sure that
arrangements for the payment of aid take account of future trends in competition. Such trends will have
to be measurable by quantifiable factors i.e. prices, market shares and other relevant factors.

(2000/C 330 E/107)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0173/00

by Salvador Garriga Polledo (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: EU cooperation to help Mexico pay off the bank rescue debt

(31 January 2000)

The Mexican authorities will shortly be investing some 840 million dollars in bonds to begin covering the
liabilities from the bank rescue programme. The aim is to meet the commitments given to banking
institutions under the bank bailout scheme.

After the 1995 financial crisis, the Mexican Government pumped funds into banks to prevent a collapse of
the financial system, mainly by purchasing overdue loan portfolios in exchange for debt bonds.

What part has the Commission played in this process, by which Mexico is seeking to pay off its bank
rescue debt, and what other Community measures have been devised to help one of the EU(cid:146)s most
important partners to overcome once and for all the long-standing financial crisis going back to 1995?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(2 March 2000)

The Community did not contribute to the package of emergency financial assistance put together by the
international financial community in 1995 in response to the financial crisis experienced by Mexico at the
end of 1994. This package comprised mainly contributions from the United States, the International
monetary fund (IMF) and Canada, although other international financial institutions (the World Bank and
the Inter-American Development Bank, in particular) also reinforced their lending operations for Mexico in
the aftermath of the crisis.

Since 1995, the Mexican economy has made substantial progress in addressing the macroeconomic,
financial and structural problems that contributed to the 1995 crisis and economic growth has resumed.
increase domestic saving, rebuild its foreign
Mexico has also managed to reduce inflation markedly,
exchange reserves, and maintain the budget deficit at moderate levels. As for the banking system, although
it remains fragile, its position has been considerably strengthened over the last five years. Regulation and
supervision arrangements have been enhanced and various support programmes for banks and debtors
have been implemented.

In this context, there does not seem to be an obvious justification for considering at this stage a further
round of financial support for Mexico from the international community. The intended issuance by the
Savings Protection Institute (IPAB) of floating rate notes to replace bank claims on the institute stemming
from the 1995 bank bail-out should strengthen the asset side of banks(cid:146) balance sheet without a significant

C 330 E/98

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

21.11.2000

impact on Mexico(cid:146)s budget. This will be a market-based operation not requiring in principle international
support. In any case, Mexico can continue to draw until the end of the year on its stand-by arrangement
with the IMF.

The best way to help Mexico in the current circumstances is not by providing further financial support but
by facilitating its integration into the world economy. The provisions of the economic partnership,
political coordination, and cooperation agreement with Mexico, and in particular those on trade and
financial services, should provide a suitable framework in this respect. They should contribute to foster
trade and investment flows between the Community and Mexico.

(2000/C 330 E/108)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0178/00

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) and Helmuth Markov (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(31 January 2000)

Subject: Discontinuing of train services between the Netherlands and Germany after upgrading of the

Nieuweschans (cid:129) Weneer section of the TEN

1.
Is the Commission aware that passenger rail services between Groningen in the Netherlands and
Bremen in Germany have so far been restricted to three trains a day in each direction and that there has
even been talk of cancelling the service, which would mean that there would no longer be any public
transport between the northern regions of the two countries.

2.
Is the Commission also aware that for years the main argument put forward in support of this
restricted service was that the section of the line between the border localities of Nieuweschans (Nether-
lands) and Weener (Germany, Lower Saxony) was dilapidated and single-track, as a result of which the
speed had to be restricted to 30 km an hour in some places, and that the necessary repairs were not
regarded as viable?

3.
Can the Commission confirm that as from 1 April 2000 rail traffic on the border section of the track
will be suspended for six months (and replaced by a bus service) so that this neglected line can at last be
upgraded at a cost of at least EUR 16,5 million and the train speed increased to 120 km per hour, except
on the swing bridge over the Ems between Papenburg and Leer, which is needed because of shipbuilding,
and that the cost of the German section of the work is being funded partly with monies allocated to the
trans-European networks?

4.
Does the Commission realise that the Netherlandse Spoorwegen (NS) have cancelled the Deutsche
Bahn VT624 train used hitherto so that the new regional rail company NordNed can take over the service
but that NooordNed has not has not yet come to any agreement on a subsidy with the Netherlands
Province of Groningen and the German Land of Lower Saxony and that no application for a timetable for
the winter period 2000-2001 has been submitted to the rail authorities?

5. What steps does the Commission intend to take to prevent a situation in which, as a result of the
withdrawal of the two national railway companies involved and insufficient regional subsidies, passenger
services on this railway line do not resume on completion of the repair work in October 2000, which
would mean that upgrading the TEN link had been pointless?

Supplementary answer
given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(30 March 2000)

The Commission is aware that the state of the rail infrastructure along the 17 kilometer (km) long cross-
border section Nieuweschans (cid:129) Weener (cid:129) Ihrhove, which forms part of the line Groningen (Netherlands)
(cid:129) Leer (Germany), is currently insufficient, and that this situation has a negative impact on the quality of
railway services (speed limitation in particular).