WRITTEN QUESTION E-0933/00 by Helmuth Markov (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Commission investigations against the German Land of Thuringia.
Date: 2000-03-29
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Federation State, State aid, Structural Funds, Thuringia, financial control, management audit, operational programme

13.3.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 81 E/9

As indicated in the white paper for food safety under action 22 of the action plan on food safety,
a proposal for amending Council Directive 96/25/EEC on the circulation of feed materials (5) could be
adopted by the Commission for submission to the Council and Parliament by December 2002, following
reflection to decide whether an exclusive positive list of authorised feed materials should be established.
Furthermore, as indicated under action 30 of that action plan, a proposal for a regulation of the Parliament
and of the Council establishing new rules for the disposal and the processing of animal waste and animal
by-products is in preparation. This proposal will lay down a positive list of animal by-products, which may
be used for the preparation of feed materials of animal origin. Its submission to the Council and to the
Parliament is scheduled for June 2000.

(1) OJ L 115, 4.5.1999.
(2) OJ L 297, 18.11.1999.
(3) COM(1999) 719 final.
(4) OJ L 184, 17.7.1999.
(5) OJ C 261, 19.8.1998.

(2001/C 81 E/011)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0933/00

by Helmuth Markov (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(29 March 2000)

Subject: Commission investigations against the German Land of Thuringia

1. What investigation procedures in connection with subsidies under EU programmes and directives
have been or are being carried out by the Commission against the Land of Thuringia, and when did these
begin?

2. What has been the outcome of the investigations under competition law which have already been
completed? What is the financial scope of the procedures under investigation, and into what particular
areas can they be broken down?

3.
Has the Land government been involved in the investigation process or informed about the outcome,
and have any specific demands for changes on specific matters been made? If so, when, and on what
matters?

4. What are the possible consequences for the Land of Thuringia, and what is the Commission(cid:146)s
assessment of these?

5. Which investigation procedures have not yet been completed, when is this likely to happen and to
what matters do they relate?

Is there a need to alter the customary procedures for the implementation of EU programmes and

6.
directives in Thuringia; if so, which, and in which areas?

Supplementary answer
given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(7 September 2000)

1.
The operational programmes under the Structural Funds have been in place in the Land of Thuringia
since 29 March 1991. These programmes are examined on the basis of the regulations governing the
implementation of the Structural Funds, particularly those provisions on evaluation. This is an ongoing
process which covers the entire financial package involved.

As one of its activities implementing the European Social Fund the Commission carried out monitoring
visits to Germany (as to the other Member States), including a visit to Thuringia. Following one of these
monitoring visits the German authorities agreed,
in 1999, to waive their entitlement to non-eligible
expenditure under an ESF programme managed by Thuringia(cid:146)s Ministry of Culture. This non-eligible
expenditure totalled some € 5,7 million.

C 81 E/10

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

13.3.2001

Investigations carried out under Community competition law in Thuringia were part of

2.
monitoring process for state aid.

the

As regards industry,
in 1999 and 2000 the Commission decided to recover aid of DEM 34 750 000
granted to the Triptis Porzellan company, operating in the household articles and porcelain sector, aid of
DEM 36 860 000 granted to the Weida Leder company, active in the leather sector, and aid of
DEM 13 850 000 granted to the Korn Fahrzeuge company (agricultural technology, purchase and sale of
commercial vehicles and trucks, and environmental technology). On the other hand, aid of DEM 9 100 000
was granted to the Everts Erfurt company (rubber and latex products sector).

In the agricultural sphere, about fifty schemes have been or are currently being investigated, many of
which involve aid for rescuing and restructuring. As regards pending notifications, the Commission may
approve the measures or initiate proceedings pursuant to Article 88 (ex-Article 93) (2) of the EC Treaty.
Moreover, the Commission twice initiated proceedings pursuant to Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty in cases
involving state aid for the processing and placing on the market of agricultural products. Final decisions
have not yet been reached on these two cases. Following a request from the German authorities, the
it is not possible to
amount of aid granted is treated as confidential information. Generally speaking,
the measures under
finance to the agricultural sector from all of
determine the total amount of
investigation.

The Honourable Member appears to be referring to the verification of both the procedures for the
3.
granting of Structural Funds subsidies and the procedures for investigating state aid. As regards the
Structural Funds, the Commission would point out that it is responsible for assessing the use of subsidies
granted from these Community Funds: this assessment is carefully monitored by the Court of Auditors.

The Member States (cid:129) and, for regional programmes, the regions (cid:129) receive official notification of the
outcome of these assessments, and must then give an opinion on these.

As regards state aid, the Member State concerned (the Federal German authorities, in the case in point) is
the only partner involved in discussions with the Commission. Several letters have been written to the
German authorities about the above-mentioned cases. As to any potential involvement of the Thuringia
authorities in investigating the procedures and their findings, we should point out that the Commission is
not aware of the division of responsibilities between the federal authorities and this Land.

The Honourable Member would also appear to be referring to the procedures covering the granting

4.
of subsidies under the Structural Funds as well as to those covering the investigation of state aid.

As regards Structural Funds subsidies to Thuringia, we have not, from 1991 to date, considered any
reimbursement of Community financing to be necessary.

Investigations into state aid result in such aid being authorised or prohibited. In the latter case, the aid
must be recovered if it has already been paid out. The Member State has to take the necessary steps to
recover such aid from the companies involved.

5.
The results of the mid-term evaluation of the 1994-1999 programming period of the Structural
Funds will, in particular, affect programming for the period 2000-2006. The next mid-term evaluation is
scheduled for 2003. The (cid:145)ex-post(cid:146) evaluation for the 1994-1999 period can only take place once
expenditure for the projects of this period has closed, i.e. in principle after 31 December 2001.

As regards state aid to the agricultural sector, as mentioned above, about ten cases are currently being
studied, including two cases in which the procedure set out in Article 88 (2) of the EC Treaty has been
invoked (C 32/99 and C 73/99), both involving state aid to two companies active in the processing and
placing on the market of agricultural products. A final decision concerning these two lots of state aid is
expected to be taken during the second half of this year. As regards state aid to industry, the Commission
has initiated proceedings pursuant to Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty against several schemes, particularly
certain activities of the Th(cid:252)ringer Industriebeteiligungsgesellschaft, the Th(cid:252)ringer Landesentwicklungsge-
sellschaft, the Th(cid:252)ringer Konsolidierungsprogramm (1993-1996), the Th(cid:252)ringer Darlehnsprogramm, the

13.3.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 81 E/11

Th(cid:252)ringer Umlaufmittelprogramm (1993-1996) and the Th(cid:252)ringer KMU-Investitionssicherungsprogramm
(before 1997). Proceedings pursuant to Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty have also been initiated in several
cases where individual aid was granted to industrial companies. Since investigations are ongoing in all of
these cases, it is difficult to say exactly when they will be closed.

6.
As regards the Structural Funds, the Thuringia operational programme for the period 2000-2006 has
not yet been approved by the Commission, but will be in the near future. The programme itself will be
required to define its implementation methods in order to fulfil the obligations established by new
Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural
Funds (1). It is therefore not possible at present to determine the extent to which changes will have to be
made to existing procedures.

Finally, the issue of whether Thuringia must alter the procedures normally used for the transposition of
Community Directives is an entirely internal matter. In fact, the Community may not become involved in
the division of responsibilities between a Member State and its federal regions. Moreover, the Commission
does not have the means to examine the conditions under which Directives are transposed in any given
region of a Member State.

(1) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.

(2001/C 81 E/012)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0936/00

by James Nicholson (PPE-DE) to the Council

(30 March 2000)

Subject: Jubilee 2000 Coalition

The Jubilee 2000 Coalition is campaigning for debt cancellation for the world(cid:146)s poorest countries.
The Cologne Initiative of G7 countries provides for cancellation for around 33 countries but offers
nothing to many other countries, identified by the Coalition as being in urgent need of assistance.

Does the Council support the objectives of the Jubilee 2000 Coalition? What action has the Council taken
to reduce demands for debt repayment by the world(cid:146)s poorest countries?

Reply

(29 September 2000)

The EU and the Member States are fully aware of the difficulties many poor countries face because of their
excessive debt, which affects their development prospects and undermines their political stability and
progress towards democracy.

In order to alleviate the debt burden, the EU and the Member States have actively taken or participated in
initiatives at various levels, in conformity with their competencies.

On 6 July 1998, the Council decided to participate fully in the HIPC (Highly Indebted Poor Countries)
initiative launched by the IMF and the World Bank. This initiative was based on a commitment by the
international financial community to reduce countries(cid:146) debt burden to a sustainable level provided that the
country completes a period of strong economic policy performance.

At the G7 Cologne summit in June 1999, Ministers agreed to an (cid:145)expanded HIPC initiative that will
provide faster, deeper and broader debt relief(cid:146).

The European Council of Cologne in 1999 highlighted the importance (cid:145)of finding a lasting solution to the
debt problems of the poorest countries. The European Council welcomes the common European position