WRITTEN QUESTION E-0566/00 by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission. Implications of asymmetrical legal position of ownership.
Date: 2000-02-29
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU Member State, acquisition of property, common commercial policy, electrical industry, market access, merger control, national law, public sector

C 46 E/14

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

13.2.2001

The Commission is currently updating the above report and is, of course, ready to be of further assistance
to the Honourable Member, should he be interested to obtain more precise information on the subject.

Statistics relating to legal acts adopted by the Community
(CELEX Data Base) (cid:129) 1995-1999

1995

38

1996

79

1997

122

1998

70

1999

78

Total
1995-1999

387

Statistics relating to technical regulations notified within the framework
of Directive 83/189/EEC/Directive 98/34/EC (cid:129) 1995-1999

Notifications

Member States

Belgium
Denmark
Germany
Greece
Spain
France
Ireland
Italy
Luxembourg
The Netherlands
Austria
Portugal
Finland
Sweden
United Kingdom

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Total
1995-1999

26
36
92
12
25
61
1
31
1
43
25
5
17
5
59

17
28
88
16
19
41
4
27
0
62
61
19
34
34
73

59
40
99
12
35
51
3
31
0
341
106
7
22
23
71

900

50
55
76
11
24
47
1
32
2
122
69
11
23
30
51

604

20
43
85
17
31
54
4
25
1
128
69
6
24
35
49

591

172
202
440
68
134
254
13
146
4
696
330
48
120
127
303

3 057

Total (15)

439

523

(1) 28 February 1995-III/2185-EN/final-Experience acquired in the framework of Directive 83/189/EEC.

(2001/C 46 E/017)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0566/00

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(29 February 2000)

Subject: Implications of asymmetrical legal position of ownership

In what sectors of the EU economy is it still the case that an asymmetrical legal position concerning
ownership still exists, in other words, where it is possible for a state-owned company in one Member State
to buy a private company in another, but where it is impossible for a private company to enter the market
of the state-owned company? Is this still the case of the French electricity market? What measures is the
Commission taking to open up those markets it indicates?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(19 May 2000)

The Commission does not have at its disposal the necessary data to give the Honorable Member an
exhaustive answer on all the asymmetrical legal positions of ownership in all sectors of the economy.

13.2.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 46 E/15

As a general point, the Commission would note that the presence of state enterprises in certain sectors of
economic activity is a matter solely for the Member States, within the limits of the rules imposed by the
EC Treaty and of the policies liberalising certain economic sectors at Community level.

The electricity sector is regulated by Parliament and Council Directive 96/92/EC of 19 December 1996
concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity (1). The Directive does not regulate the
ownership of electricity companies, but lays down the rules relating to the organisation and functioning of
the electricity sector and access to the market. Nevertheless, the Commission follows the issue of mergers
and acquisitions in the electricity sector very closely. Where these have a Community aspect, they will be
dealt with under the Merger Regulation (Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 of 21 December 1989 on
the control of concentrations between undertakings) (2).

(1) OJ L 27, 30.1.1997.
(2) OJ L 395, 30.12.1989; as last amended by OJ L 40, 13.2.1998.

(2001/C 46 E/018)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0570/00

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Council

(2 March 2000)

Subject: Extension of qualified majority voting

Will the Council please indicate which Member States proposed an extension of qualified majority voting
and in which areas during the last two Intergovernmental Conferences, which were agreed and which
Member States were opposed to such extension?

Reply

(10 July 2000)

The Council would like to remind the Honourable Member that the Intergovernmental Conference is a
temporary forum, composed of representatives of the Governments of the Member States and separate
from the Council.

The Council
positions adopted by the Member States in the IGC.

is not, therefore, entitled to answer questions relating to the proceedings of the IGC or

(Directorate-General

As the Honourable Member will be aware, extension of qualified majority voting is a recurrent topic of
discussion at Intergovernmental Conferences and is making headway as the Treaties evolve. With regard to
the progress made in Maastricht, the Council would refer to a study carried out by the European
Parliament Secretariat
for Research, Political and Institutional Affairs Division)
in January 1996. As regards the progress made in Amsterdam, the Council would point out that it was
agreed that meetings of the Preparatory Group of representatives of the Governments of the Member
States should be attended by two Members of the European Parliament, as observers, who could voice the
European Parliament(cid:146)s views on all issues under discussion and who would receive the relevant documen-
tation. This was also intended to keep Members of the European Parliament better informed about the
course of proceedings and the actual results achieved.

For the current IGC, the same arrangements apply. The Honourable Member is therefore sure to be
informed of progress at the Conference, and particularly of positions stated on extension of qualified
majority voting, by the European Parliament observers.