WRITTEN QUESTION E-1458/00 by Reinhold Messner (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Extension of licences to operate motorways in Italy.
Date: 2000-05-10
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU Member State, Italy, application of EU law, motorway, service concession

20.2.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 53 E/145

How can the Commission go along with the separation between the construction and the operation of
infrastructure, a principle which is not permitted under Italian law (see Law No 463 of 21 May 1955 and
Decree No 537 of 17 April 1948) but which lies behind the setting up of the independent committee
responsible for awarding the Autostrade SpA contracts?

Does the Commission not consider that the fact that the licence holder is represented on the committee of
experts may undermine the committee(cid:146)s independence?

Does the Commission not consider that the link between the licence holder(cid:146)s business activities and its
political responsibilities, which is a basic feature of the committee of experts (appointed by the Public
Works Ministry), will have the effect of restricting the ability of the public authorities to exercise control
over transport policy?

(1) OJ C 225 E, 8.8.2000, p. 89.

Answer by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(26 June 2000)

the formation of

In spite of
the independent committee to which the honourable Member refers,
Autostrade S.p.A. continues to be in charge of the construction and the operation of the infrastructure,
since the committee in question acts solely at the award phase of public works contracts and solely in
order to launch and administer award procedures. This instance does not therefore affect the concept of
works concession laid down in Council Directive 93/37/EEC of 14 June 1993 concerning the coordination
of procedures for the award of public works contracts (1).

This committee was formed solely as a result of the Commission(cid:146)s insistence that competition should be as
open as possible, with the exclusion from such procedures of the licence-holding company and associate
companies.

As for the composition of the committee, however,
the Commission immediately asked the Italian
authorities for information, with a view to checking whether the commitments regarding the impartiality
and independence of the committee had in fact been respected.

(1) OJ L 199, 9.8.1993.

(2001/C 53 E/186)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1458/00

by Reinhold Messner (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

Subject: Extension of licences to operate motorways in Italy

(10 May 2000)

In reply to a previous question on the extension of motorway licences in Italy (E-2292/99) (1) the
Commission stated that it had initiated two further proceedings and that it had approached the Italian
authorities in order to clarify the various aspects of the issue of the extension of the licences without
public invitation to tender, contrary to the provisions of Directives 92/50/EEC (2), 93/37/EEC (3) and 89/
440/EEC (4). In addition, the Commission stated in its written answer that a meeting was planned with the
Italian authorities responsible and that it had asked all the Member States about existing circumstances
regarding motorway licences. According to media reports, 19 of the motorway licences in Italy are about
to be given the definitive go-ahead.

In the light of these assertions, can the Commission:

(cid:129) Specify which motorway licence extensions in Italy are the subject of the proceedings referred to

above, and say if in the meantime any further proceedings have been initiated?

(cid:129) Say what the outcome of the meeting with the Italian authorities was?

C 53 E/146

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.2.2001

(cid:129) Say what the results of the survey of all the Member States was?

(cid:129) Give its definitive opinion on the consistency of such extensions with Community law in general and

Directives 92/50/EEC, 93/37/EEC and 89/440/EEC in particular?

(1) OJ C 225 E, 8.8.2000, p. 88.
(2) OJ L 209, 24.7.1992, p. 1.
(3) OJ L 199, 9.8.1993, p. 54.
(4) OJ L 210, 21.7.1989, p. 1.

Answer by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(26 June 2000)

The proceedings currently under way involving Italy with regard to motorway licences concern the
construction of the Venice-Mestre section, the (cid:145)Tibre(cid:146) section and the Asti-Cuneo link.

At the meeting held in December 1999, the Commission again asked the Italian authorities for informa-
tion concerning the proceedings that were under way. The information that was subsequently provided is
now being studied by the Commission as part of the horizontal study covering all Member States.

The Commission does not yet have all the information that is needed to make a final judgement on the
problems in connection with the arrangements for awarding motorway licences in the Member States, and
it is currently drawing up a general review of the facts that will allow it to make the appropriate legal
assessment.

(2001/C 53 E/187)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1459/00

by Marianne Thyssen (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(10 May 2000)

Subject: The European JOB and ECIP programmes

The ECIP and JOB financial instruments, the aim of which was to stimulate the internationalisation of
European SMEs through joint ventures, have been very successful in the past.

The intermediary financial
programmes are to be stopped. No provision is being made for a replacement programme.

institutions have recently been informed by the Commission that

these

This is highly regrettable, particularly in the case of the JOB programme, which is geared to joint ventures
with undertakings in Eastern European candidate countries.

1.

Can the Commission say why these two programmes are being stopped?

2.

Can the Commission say if it has taken measures to ensure the completion of current projects?

Can the Commission say what it plans to do with the JEV programme, which is designed to stimulate

3.
joint ventures between small and medium-sized enterprises in the European Union?