WRITTEN QUESTION E-1900/00 by Antonios Trakatellis (PPE-DE), Ioannis Averoff (PPE-DE) and Ioannis Marínos (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Outdated structures in Greek agriculture and distortion of competition: unlawful practices by ATE and the reimbursement of illegal aid by AGNO.
Date: 2000-06-16
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Greece, State aid, agricultural bank, agricultural cooperative, agricultural structure, aid to undertakings, competition law, restriction on competition, support policy

13.3.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 81 E/105

underpinning various instruments (Al-Invest, Meda-Invest) and the reforms embarked on by the new
Commission to ensure the sound management of Community resources and reduce the risks and
complexity of the programmes financed.

To cover the management and technical assistance costs arising from the closure of existing ECIP
operations, the Commission has proposed that the Council and the Parliament adopt a legal basis in the
form of a regulation. That regulation is intended to confine the budget(cid:146)s use for the financial supervision of
operations specifically covered by contracts concluded before 31 December 1999, technical assistance and
the audits necessary for the closure of the ECIP. This means that no operation has been appraised,
approved or contracted since 31 December 1999. By the same token, projects submitted prior to that date,
but for which no contracts were signed, have had to be abandoned. The Commission has formally notified
the financial institutions and other beneficiaries directly concerned by the decision.

(2001/C 81 E/127)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1900/00

by Antonios Trakatellis (PPE-DE), Ioannis Averoff (PPE-DE)
and Ioannis Mar(cid:237)nos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(16 June 2000)

Subject: Outdated structures in Greek agriculture and distortion of competition: unlawful practices by ATE

and the reimbursement of illegal aid by AGNO

One of the outdated structures in Greek agriculture is the Agricultural Bank of Greece (ATE) which, by
practising an interventionist policy, has created unfair competition, distortions and illegal monopolistic
financial practices in this sector. In its recent decision of 1 March 2000 the Commission requested (1) the
return of 2,5 billion drachmas wrongfully received by AGNO, the dairy cooperative organisation, (2)
information on the take-over of AGNO by ATE, (3) information on the relationship of the Greek state with
ATE and (4) the dossier on partnership arrangements by the ATE.

On this basis, can the Commission say:

1. how it views Greek agricultural structures and government policy in the agricultural sector in the light

of repeated decisions by the Commission on the granting of illegal aid?

2. Does the investigation which led the Commission to take the above decision reveal any abuse by ATE
of its dominant position in the Greek agricultural economy, and what measures should be taken to
ensure that the rules of competition are adhered to and that farmers and businessmen receive equal
treatment?

3. How does the Commission view ATE(cid:146)s take-over of AGNO and ATE(cid:146)s relationship with the Greek
state, and what do ATE and the Greek Government undertake to do in the future in order to comply
with the Community legal order concerning aid and competition?

4. Why did the Commission delay so much in taking this decision and why was the decision not

announced when it was taken in March?

5.

In the decision of 1 March 2000, was account taken of the viability of AGNO and,
measures are envisioned to ensure its survival?

if so, what

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(14 July 2000)

1.
The Commission has no general position on the Greek government policy in the agricultural sector.
In certain cases, the Commission considered that the write-offs of loans to companies, co-operatives and
farmers constituted state aid incompatible with the Treaty rules.

C 81 E/106

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

13.3.2001

The Commission decision of 1 March 2000 does not concern abuse of dominant position by the
2.
agricultural bank of Greece (ATE)
in the Greek agricultural economy in the meaning of Article 82
(ex Article 86) of the EC Treaty. However, the Commission may launch an investigation of the relations
between the Greek state and the ATE, which would primarily concern state aids to the agricultural
undertakings. If relevant, the Commission may also address possible anti-competitive practices of the ATE
in the agricultural sector.

3.
The Commission does not yet have a definitive position on the implications in terms of state aid of
the takeover of AGNO by ATE. It has requested additional information from the Greek authorities in the
scope of the above-mentioned decision.

4.
The time from the opening of Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty procedure to the final decision (2 years
and 2 months) is in line with the complexity of the file. The Commission does not normally announce in
advance the issuing of its state aid decisions.

5.
In its decision of 1 March 2000, the Commission considered that the aid scheme put in effect by
Article 5 of Greek law nr. 2237/94 (and the individual aid granted to AGNO pursuant to that scheme) did
not respect the relevant Community guidelines for rescuing and restructuring companies in difficulty.

(2001/C 81 E/128)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1901/00

by Graham Watson (ELDR) and Hartmut Nassauer (PPE-DE) to the Council

(19 June 2000)

Subject: Agreement between Spain and the United Kingdom on Gibraltar and participation in the UK in

certain aspects of the Schengen agreements

At the meeting of Coreper of 19 April the ambassadors of Spain and the UK announced the signature of
letters of agreement about certain matters related to Gibraltar which had hitherto prevented agreement in
Council on a number of legislative acts in the field of Justice and Home Affairs.

These letters covered the areas of:

(cid:129) the authority competent to represent Gibraltar ((cid:145)postbox in London(cid:146));

(cid:129) Gibraltar(cid:146)s identity documents;

(cid:129) questions to participation in the Schengen acquis, and

(cid:129) police cooperation in the framework of the Schengen Convention.

Would the Council inform Parliament of the content of this agreement?

Will the Council now accede to the request by the United Kingdom to adhere to certain aspects of the
Schengen agreement, and to cooperation in asylum and immigration policies under Title 4 of the
EC Treaty?

Reply

(10 October 2000)

The honourable Members of the European Parliament are informed that:

1. The agreed arrangements relating to Gibraltar authorities in the context of E.U. and E.C. instruments
and related treaties is contained in document 7998/00 JAI 45 MI 73 which is herewith transmitted to
the European Parliament for information. The document exists only in the original English and
Spanish versions.