WRITTEN QUESTION E-1707/00 by Karin Riis-Jørgensen (ELDR) to the Commission. Tendering.
Date: 2000-05-29
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Denmark, application of EU law, intervention policy, works contract

C 103 E/22

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.4.2001

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(20 July 2000)

The Commission put forward a proposal on 22 May 2000 to authorise Sweden to continue to apply
quantitative restrictions from 1 July 2000 until the end of 2003 for products subject to excise duties
brought into Sweden from other Member States (1). This proposal, which also provided for the gradual
liberalisation of the restrictions during that period, was adopted by the Council on 30 June 2000 (2). The
new provision adopted no longer contains a review mechanism similar to that mentioned by the
Honourable Member and contained in the previous version of the Directive. Therefore, the discussion on
the exact meaning of this review mechanism has become irrelevant.

As to this review mechanism, the Commission has always taken the view that the derogation granted to
Sweden expired on 30 June 2000 unless the Commission proposed, and the Council adopted by
unanimity, a further extension, as the restrictions derogate to the basic principle laid down in Council
Directive 92/12/EEC of 25 February 1992 on the general arrangements for products subject to excise duty
and on the holding movement and monitoring of such products (3) that goods acquired by a private person
and transported by them are subject to excises in the Member State of purchase. This view is in accordance
with the well-established principle of Community law that any derogation contained in a directive must be
interpreted restrictively.

The Honourable Member is requested to submit the last part of the question directly to the Council.

(1) COM(2000) 295 final of 22.05.2000.
(2) Council Directive 2000/44 of 30 June 2000 amending Council Directive 92/12/EEC of 25 February 1992 as
regards temporary quantitative restrictions for products subject to excise duties brought into Sweden from other
Member States.
(3) OJ L 76, 23.3.1992.

(2001/C 103 E/023)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1707/00

by Karin Riis-Jłrgensen (ELDR) to the Commission

(29 May 2000)

Subject: Tendering

Over a four year period Danish local and district authorities have multiplied sevenfold the number of tasks
performed by one public authority for another for payment. This steep increase has occurred even though
the Danish Government has on several occasions assured the Commission that local and district authorities
would perform tasks only where there was no or no more than restricted competition with private
undertakings.

On the basis of the Danish Ministry of the Interior(cid:146)s statement to the Commission of 31 March the Danish
Trades Council has ascertained that some 90 % of the work carried out for a total of Kr. 174 million could
have been carried out by private firms. The work involved included gardening, care of green spaces, street
laboratory work and analyses, delivering food, sale of frozen meals, laundry services, minor
sweeping,
landscaping and building work, painting, blacksmith(cid:146)s work, transport services, cleaning, computer services
etc. Since 1997 activities as a whole have increased from scarcely Kr. 250 million a year to Kr. 174 million
in 1999 (including tenders not yet carried out) and there are strong indications that the proportion of
work which could also have been carried out by private undertakings has also risen.

What is the Commission(cid:146)s attitude towards this increase in activity in relation to Law No 378 of 14 June
1995 on local and district authorities(cid:146) performance of work for other public authorities and the Danish
Ministry of the Interior(cid:146)s statement to the Commission of 31 March 2000, in the light of the fact that the
vast majority of this work could also have been carried out by private undertakings?

3.4.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 103 E/23

Does the Commission intend to put a stop to those activities mentioned in Law No 378 of 14 June 1995
on the performance of work by local and district authorities for other public authorities which are carried
out in competition with private undertakings?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(20 July 2000)

Member States are free to buy products and services where and from whom they want, as long as they
respect the Community rules on public procurement.

Member States must make sure that undertakings, private or public, do not receive overcompensation
for any service or product of general economic interest, which they are requested to provide under
Article 86(2) (ex Article 90) of the EC Treaty, in order to avoid the use of such overcompensation to cross
subsidise their other commercial activities. As long as the above principles are respected the Commission
has no power to intervene.

The Commission is currently examining the implications under the Community rules on public procure-
ment of the law and the examples of its concrete application mentioned in the Danish Ministry of
Interior(cid:146)s statement to the Commission of 31 March 2000.

(2001/C 103 E/024)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1737/00

by Ioannis Souladakis (PSE) to the Council

(5 June 2000)

Subject: Funding of European Union island regions

What action does the Council intend to take in order to create the necessary legal basis for the funding of
European Union island regions from the EU budget set for 2001, in accordance with the provisions of the
Treaty of Amsterdam and the guidelines for the 2001 budget that Parliament has already voted on
(paragraph 33)?

Reply

(9 November 2000)

1.
The Council recognises that island regions suffer from structural handicaps as a result of their being
islands. It has always attributed the greatest importance to financial instruments intended, when that is
justified, to integrate those regions more satisfactorily into the internal market under equitable conditions.

2.
In the context of economic and social cohesion, the Structural Funds are, in this connection, an
important instrument for action, having a positive effect on the growth and convergence of island regions.

3.
Under the new regulatory framework of the Structural Funds, the least favoured islands in the
European Union meeting the criteria of eligibility defined in the general Regulation may benefit specifically
from Community financial help under Objective 1 (regions lagging behind in development) or Objective 2
(areas undergoing social and economic conversion).