WRITTEN QUESTION E-0276/00 by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission. Lack of credibility in Eurostat's PPP data.
Date: 2000-02-07
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Eurostat, purchasing power parity

C 303 E/170

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

24.10.2000

(2000/C 303 E/190)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0276/00

by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission

(7 February 2000)

Subject: Lack of credibility in Eurostat(cid:146)s PPP data

For at least the last 25 years, Germany(cid:146)s national statistics office in Wiesbaden has been publishing a series
of data comparing prices in Portugal with those in Germany (cid:129) over the last few years, on a monthly basis
(Preise, Fachserie 17, Reihe 10, Internationaler Vergleich der Preise f(cid:252)r die Lebenshaltung, Statistiches
Budesamt, various months).

The data published by the German national statistics office systematically reveal a level of prices for
Portugal which is much higher than the level recorded by Eurostat. For example, Eurostat maintains that,
in 1995, Portuguese consumer prices were 41,4 % lower than German prices (Purchasing Power Parities
and Related Economic Indicators, results for 1995 and 1996, Eurostat), whereas Germany(cid:146)s national
statistics office, in the above-mentioned publication for 1995, detected a difference of only 6,3 % for the
same indicator.

Since 1998 the data released by Eurostat (which are implicit in GDP statistics, since the PPP results have
not been published) continue to present Portuguese prices (GDP prices, since consumer prices have not
been divulged) as being much lower than German prices, whilst the German national statistics office has
concluded, in the case of consumer prices as well, that the escudo is overvalued.

Does the Commission believe that the use of an indicator which produces totally different (if not to say
contradictory) values when published by different statistical bodies can be regarded as (cid:145)completely correct(cid:146)
and as reflecting (cid:145)current practice(cid:146)?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(28 March 2000)

The statistics of the Statistisches Bundesamt publication to which the Honourable Member refers are not
produced using the same methodology or with the same purpose as those produced by the Commission to
calculate purchasing power parities.

There are three main reasons why the results of the two publications are different. The Eurostat results
include all consumption at the level of overall gross domestic product (GDP); in other words, not only the
final consumption expenditure of households, but also the final consumption expenditure of government
and gross fixed capital formation. The results presented in the German publication cover only the final
consumption expenditure, but not even all of that, since rents, cars and insurance are excluded. In the case
of rents, for example, which in 1995 represented 17,4 % of private final consumption expenditure in
Germany compared with 4,7 % in Portugal, the price index for Portugal was 78 % lower than that of
Germany. Similarly, for the final consumption expenditure of government, which in 1995 accounted for
12 % of GDP in Germany and as much as 18,1 % in Portugal, the Portuguese price index was 68 % lower
than that of Germany.

In addition, products and services are weighted differently, since Eurostat takes the national structure of
household consumption into account for each Member State (the German structure for Germany, the
Portuguese for Portugal, and so on), whereas the Statistisches Bundesamt bases its analyses for all countries
on Germany(cid:146)s structure of household consumption.

Finally, the two analyses serve different purposes. Eurostat defines the purchasing power parities in order
to make a general comparison of all the European countries analysed (multilateral comparisons), whereas
the German national statistics office produces results simply with a view to provide bilateral comparisons
between Germany and the other countries. Unlike Eurostat, which produces and publishes its statistics on
purchasing power parities for an international audience, the Statistisches Bundesamt produces its statistics
for domestic purposes.

24.10.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 303 E/171

Because of their differences in methodology and purpose, the two publications do not, therefore, lend
themselves to comparison; their results should be seen as complementing, not contradicting, each other.

(2000/C 303 E/191)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0278/00

by Ewa Hedkvist Petersen (PSE) to the Commission

(7 February 2000)

Subject: Situation regarding imports of game and wildfowl from Russia

The EU has not yet authorised imports of game from Russia on the grounds that there have been
occasional
instances of foot-and-mouth disease and Newcastle disease in some parts of the country.
However, those diseases are not present, and reportedly have never been present, in the northern regions
which are of interest to Nordic importers of game among others. The procedure for providing veterinary
documentation in Russia, however, is inadequate, which has led to delays in assessing various regions in
that country. The process of assessing northern Russia has lasted several years and no findings are
forthcoming.

What information can the Commission provide about the current situation in this regard to enable Nordic
importers of game, among others, to obtain clarification of the conditions applying to imports of game
from northern Russia?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(28 March 2000)

Commission Decision 97/217/EC of 28 February 1997, lays down groups of third countries, or parts
thereof, which are authorised to use the veterinary certification for imports of wild game meat, farmed
game meat and rabbit meat from third countries (1).

A Community veterinary inspection mission has been carried out in the Russian region of Murmansk, to
assess the animal and public health situation as regards the possible imports into the Community of wild
cloven-hoofed game meat, excepting swine. The mission(cid:146)s findings were encouraging and the guarantees
given by the national authorities satisfactory.

This allowed the Commission to amend by Decision 2000/161/EC of 14 February 2000 (2) the above-
from the Russian region of
mentioned decision to authorise the imports of
Murmansk.

farmed reindeer meat

As a consequence, and following the adoption of the list of Russian establishments from which Member
States authorise the import of farmed game meat, as per Commission Decision 00/161/EC of 14 February
2000 amending Decision 97/217/EC2, Russia will be in a position to export farmed game meat to the
Community from the approved establishments of the Murmansk region.

(1) OJ L 88, 3.4.1997.
(2) OJ L 51, 24.2.2000.

(2000/C 303 E/192)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0284/00

by Hans-Peter Mayer (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(11 February 2000)

Subject: Principle of equality in the British nationality acquisition criteria

The British nationality acquisition criteria are such that children of a British mother and a foreign father
cannot lay claim to British nationality if they were born before 1 January 1983, because up to that time
only the father(cid:146)s nationality could be passed on to children.