WRITTEN QUESTION P-1374/00 by Luis Berenguer Fuster (PSE) to the Commission. Confidentiality of the data contained in the file relating to the state aid made available to the Spanish electricity sector.
Date: 2000-04-26
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Spain, control of State aid, electrical industry, privatisation, transparency in decision-making

13.2.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 46 E/181

in time to be granted in the European Union(cid:146)s outermost regions. The conditions are that such aid must be
intended to reduce those additional costs of carrying out an economic activity which arise out of the
disadvantages identified in Article 299(2) of the EC Treaty, taking into account its contribution to the
future development of the region and the particular characteristics of certain economic sectors. Where
direct taxation is concerned, and without prejudice to the Commission(cid:146)s competence to assess the current
aid arrangements, it will be up to the Commission to decide what guidelines to use, inter alia, in the light
of the outcome of work currently being done by the Council(cid:146)s Code of Conduct working party.

The Commission has no intention of undermining the development of the Madeira region. On the
2.
contrary, it has demonstrated repeatedly that it is attentive to the special situation of the Community(cid:146)s
outermost regions. However, it would remind the Honourable Member that, following adoption of the
guidelines on regional state aid,
the Commission proposed to the Member States in its letters of
24 February 1998 as appropriate measures that they alter all regional aid schemes that would still be in
force on 1 January 2000 to bring them into line with the guidelines as from that date. Similarly, the
Commission called on the Member States to communicate within six months any such changes that they
were considering. On the question of the direct tax advantages granted to the Madeira Free Zone, and as
the Honourable Member himself emphasises, the main effect of the changes would be that any operating
subsidies granted after 1 January 2000 are limited in time may be granted and degressive. In addition, such
aid may be granted only where it contributes to regional development and the amount granted is in
proportion to the disadvantages it is intended to palliate. These are all conditions which will have to be
met in any case when operating aid measures are evaluated in the light of Article 299(2) of the EC Treaty.

3.
The Commission can but point out that some of the Member States(cid:146) dependent territories are not
subject to Community surveillance in matters of competition. Nevertheless, in the territories to which
Articles 87 to 89 (formerly Articles 92 to 94) of the EC Treaty apply, discriminatory treatment of any kind
is precluded by the strict and transparent application of the criteria for assessing whether state aids are
compatible with the common market, published by the Commission in the form of notices and guidelines.
It would therefore point out that, although they accepted the Commission(cid:146)s recommendations ((cid:145)appropriate
measures(cid:146)), the Portuguese authorities have not yet adjusted the arrangements applicable to the Madeira
Free Zone to make them compatible with the pertinent provisions of those guidelines.

4.
The Commission regrets that a climate of uncertainty should be affecting the free zone. However, it
would remind the Honourable Member that the Commission authorised application of the arrangements
up to 31 December 2000 only and that any future implementing rules therefore have yet to be notified to,
and examined by, the Commission prior to being implemented.

(1) COM(2000) 147 final.
(2) OJ C 74, 10.3.1998.

(2001/C 46 E/212)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1374/00

by Luis Berenguer Fuster (PSE) to the Commission

(26 April 2000)

Subject: Confidentiality of the data contained in the file relating to the state aid made available to the

Spanish electricity sector

In reply to numerous questions which I and other MEPs have tabled regarding certain details of the file
relating to the state aid to be granted to the ATCs of Spanish electricity companies, the Commission has
said that the file contains data which are confidential and which cannot therefore be communicated either
to the European Parliament or to the consumers(cid:146) association which is named in the file. The 17 April
2000 edition of the Spanish newspaper El Mundo y Expansi(cid:243)n contains an article concerning the existence
of a technical report which endorses the ATCs and from which that article even quotes paragraphs.

C 46 E/182

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

13.2.2001

It seems strange that the press should be acquainted with internal Commission reports to which MEPs are
denied access, but it is even stranger that the substance of a report which endorses the ATCs cannot be
contradicted even though, if the report reaches such a conclusion, it must contain obvious errors.

Can the Commission forward to Parliament the report which is already available to the press?

Is this an example of the Commission(cid:146)s commitment to transparency?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(26 May 2000)

With regard to the information which appeared in the Spanish press on 17 April, the Commission(cid:146)s
Spokesman(cid:146)s Service has already stated that it is far too early to comment on the possibility of a positive
decision on the costs of
transition to competition in the Spanish electricity sector. The supposed
Commission report to which the newspaper article refers is in fact an internal note by the Directorate-
General for Competition which was drawn up as a basis for discussion within the DG but has not been the
subject of any official decision. The Commission regrets that the contents of the note were leaked, but it is
not responsible for any conclusions reached by the press as to the Commission(cid:146)s final decision on the
matter. In any case, the document has nothing to do with the report submitted by an independent expert
asked by the Commission to verify certain assumptions made by the Spanish authorities regarding
calculation of the costs of transition to competition. This report contains confidential information and is
covered by the rules on business secrecy. For this reason, the Commission considers that it should not be
made available.

(2001/C 46 E/213)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1376/00

by Giles Chichester (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(4 May 2000)

Subject: Payment of a pension to an EU national moving to Australia

A Dutch citizen by birth moved to England, married and took up British nationality in 1954. Now, in her
70s and divorced, she wishes to move to Australia to live with her children. Her UK pension will be frozen
at the rate when she leaves the UK but will continue to be paid. However, the small pension to which she
is currently entitled from Holland will cease should she move out of the EU to Australia.

An unsatisfactory explanation is that the Dutch old age pension started in 1957, which was after the date
when this lady left the Netherlands, and therefore she does not qualify for her pension under Dutch law
but only under European law.

Is this not a case of discrimination on the grounds of nationality? Does the Commission agree that EU
pension rights should be equally applicable to all our citizens everywhere?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(5 June 2000)

The Honourable Member raises a question concerning the payment of an old-age pension under the
legislation of the Netherlands to a former Dutch national who acquired British nationality and now intends
to take up residence in Australia.

Under Community law there is no unified European social security system. Each Member State is
responsible for its own social security system and decides which benefits shall be provided, the conditions
for eligibility and the value of these benefits.