WRITTEN QUESTION E-0221/00 by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. State aid to the EPAC ‐ Empresa para a Agro-Alimentação e Cereais, SA (Agro-foods and Cereals Company, Ltd).
Date: 2000-02-04
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: cereals, common commercial policy, control of State aid, job preservation, marketing, public sector

26.1.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 26 E/21

The French SPD, which has not yet been submitted to the Commission, will cover the whole of France
apart from Objective 2 areas. Thus the regions affected by the oil slick may benefit from all the measures
provided for under the FIFG Regulation.

(1) OJ L 337, 30.12.1999.

(2001/C 26 E/024)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0221/00

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(4 February 2000)

Subject: State aid to the EPAC (cid:129) Empresa para a Agro-Alimenta(cid:231)ªo e Cereais, SA (Agro-foods and Cereals

Company, Ltd)

The EPAC, SA agro-foods and cereals company was recently dissolved by the Portuguese Government,
leaving only the EPAC-Comercial, which according to reports in the press is also under threat unless the
Commission authorises state aid.

The EPAC, SA employed over 1 000 workers and played a major role in cereal marketing in Portugal. Still
at stake are over 160 jobs.

What is the Commission(cid:146)s position with regard to retaining the EPAC-Comercial at least, and hence
safeguarding the jobs of the more than 160 people it employs?

What, in the light of the decisions taken, are the Commission(cid:146)s responsibilities regarding the dissolution of
the EPAC, SA and the hundreds of people now out of work as a result?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(15 March 2000)

The Commission is responsible for monitoring State aids under the EC treaty, Articles 87-89 (former
Articles 92-94) of which make aid granted by the Member States that distorts or threatens to distort
competition by favouring certain undertakings, or the production of certain goods, incompatible with the
common market.

At the end of 1996 the Commission received a complaint from private operators engaged in the cereals
trade concerning a guarantee granted by Portugal to the Empresa para a Agri-Alimenta(cid:231)ªo e Cereais, SA
(EPAC) in relation to a loan to consolidate its bank debt. On 9 July 1997, the Commission adopted a
negative final decision with regard to this guarantee. Portugal did not apply this decision, which it referred
to the Court of Justice. Legal proceedings are still continuing.

Portugal also notified the Commission of a restructuring programme for this firm and an aid measure for
In view of the relationship existing between these two public-sector
the harbour company Silopor.
companies, the Commission considered these cases together. The restructuring plans were discussed at
length by Portugal
and the Commission and proceedings were opened under Article 88(2)
(former Article 93) of the EC Treaty. (1) The final version was sent at the end of 1999. The Commission
will adopt its final position on this matter as soon as possible.

As regards the employment aspect, the Commission would stress that the financial difficulties of EPAC
resulted from its failure to adapt to the European single market in cereals, not to any obligations arising
from compliance with the Community competition rules.

The Community guidelines on State aid for firms in difficulty (2) are based on the restoration of the
economic viability of the firms which would benefit. These firms have to take internal measures under a
restructuring plan to restore their long-term viability within a reasonable timescale based on realistic
assumptions. The aid may not have a harmful impact on the other firms active on the market which do
not have access to similar aid.

C 26 E/22

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

26.1.2001

Lastly, the Community guidelines leave the Member States considerable freedom to grant aid to cover the
social costs arising from these restructuring processes.

(1) OJ C 363, 25.11.1998.
(2) OJ C 288, 9.10.1999.

(2001/C 26 E/025)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0225/00

by Daniel Hannan (PPE-DE) to the Council

(28 January 2000)

Subject: European Working Groups

The European Parliament has no power of scrutiny over the European Working Groups. Indeed little is
know of them even in national parliaments.

Will the Council supply a list of all Working Groups formed, together with their statement of purpose;
designated level and department of national representation; and brief statement of subject matter presently
under discussion?

Reply

(8 June 2000)

The Council attaches the greatest importance to openness and transparency in the European Union(cid:146)s
decision-making process. It underlines that the European Working Groups to which the Honourable
Member refers must not be confused with the committees set up to assist the European Commission
within the general framework of the Decision on Committee Procedure of 28 June 1999.

Bearing this in mind, the Council would inform the Honourable Member that, as part of the reforms to
ensure an effective Council for an enlarged Union, it has recently streamlined and reduced the number of
its preparatory bodies, which are now established in an official list. That list specifies the committees and
working parties directly involved in preparing work for Council meetings and will be implemented
gradually. It will be updated to take account of any changes. The work of all such preparatory bodies is
of course subordinate to, and scrutinised by, the Council.

Subsequent to the procedure for amending the Council(cid:146)s Rules of Procedure, which is still being finalised,
the General Secretariat of the Council is responsible for publishing the list of those preparatory bodies.
A copy of that list will accordingly be sent to the Honourable Member.

(2001/C 26 E/026)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0227/00

by JosØ Salafranca SÆnchez-Neyra (PPE-DE)
and Gerardo Galeote Quecedo (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(4 February 2000)

Subject: Arrest of moderate dissidents in Cuba

The moderate dissidents, Osvaldo PayÆ Sardinas and Hector Palacios, were recently arrested in Cuba, after
first being taken to an unknown destination. According to the Cuban Commission for Human Rights and
National Reconciliation, more than 300 dissidents and human rights activists have been arrested
since November 1999.

Is the Commission aware of these facts?

What are its views on these arrests?

Does it intend to take any action on this matter?