WRITTEN QUESTION E-2568/00 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE-DE) to the Commission. European shipbuilding industry.
Date: 2000-08-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: South Korea, common commercial policy, dumping, international commercial arbitration, international competition, shipbuilding, trade agreement (EU)

C 136 E/50

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

8.5.2001

(2001/C 136 E/056)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2568/00

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: European shipbuilding industry

(1 August 2000)

In his reply to my parliamentary Question P-1980/00 (1) on the action taken by the Commission to protect
the European shipbuilding industry from (cid:145)dumping(cid:146) by Korea, the Commissioner responsible for trade,
Pascal Lamy, informed me that the European Union had concluded an international agreement in the form
of an (cid:145)authorised act between the European Union and the Government of the Republic of Korea(cid:146), which
came into force on 22 June 2000. Pursuant to that agreement, Korea undertakes to fulfil its obligations as
regards accounting transparency, non-subsidisation and the charging of commercially viable prices,
in
which connection the agreement provides for an ad hoc consultation scheme enabling Korea(cid:146)s compliance
with the above-mentioned obligations to be checked. Korea has already agreed to hold consultations on 18
and 19 July 2000. In his reply Mr Lamy also says that (cid:145)in September 2000, pursuant to the text of the
agreement, the functioning of the agreement will be reviewed at a second meeting, to be held in Brussels(cid:146).
Lastly, he states that the Commission will continue monitoring Korea(cid:146)s compliance with the agreement and
will notify the Council at
the consultations and,
consequently, the strategy to be followed in future.

the end of September regarding the outcome of

Would the Commission keep me informed regarding the outcome of the consultations with Korea which
are due to take place during the current month of July and, if necessary, regarding any specific action
taken by Korea in compliance with the agreement?

Could the Commission provide information concerning the procedure to be followed should Korea fail to
comply with its obligations under the agreement and, in particular, is it still prepared (as it stated in its
reply to my earlier Question P-0729/00) to (cid:145)initiate an investigation [which] could end up before the WTO
Dispute Settlement Body(cid:146) if the European shipbuilding industry lodges a complaint under the regulation on
obstacles to trade? Has any such complaint yet been made by the European shipbuilding industry and, if
so, what action does the Commission intend to take in response?

Would the Commission keep me informed of future developments in this field and, in particular, of the
outcome of the meeting to be held in Brussels in September?

(1) OJ C 53 E, 20.2.2001, p. 197.

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(26 September 2000)

The consultations between the Community and Korea, held in Seoul on 18 and 19 July in the framework
of the Agreed Minutes, took place in an open, constructive atmosphere. The outcome of the first round
can be considered as fairly positive.

The Commission is currently analysing a considerable amount of legal, economic and financial information
and documentation provided by Korea as part of the transparency exercise.

Two further important results were also achieved:

(cid:129) Korea(cid:146)s agreement in principle to a survey being carried out in the shipyards on the basis of an
antidumping questionnaire to check that the prices of contracts offered by Korean shipyards are in
line with (cid:145)normal(cid:146) prices under the GATT (General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade) Anti-dumping
Agreement;

(cid:129) agreement to hold a second round of consultations in September to examine the overall functioning
of the Agreement, and, more importantly, to concentrate on finding effective solutions in order to
resolve the bilateral dispute. To this end, the announcement by the shipyards of a 5 % to 10 % price
increase for certain ships and the price monitoring mechanism set up by the Korean authorities can be
considered as early encouraging signs.

8.5.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 136 E/51

Nevertheless, the Commission wants to see where Korea(cid:146)s goodwill gestures lead and expects the Koreans
to come up with practical solutions at the second consultation meeting planned for the second fortnight
in September. The Commission will report the outcome of the consultations to the Council at the end
of September. Parliament will obviously be kept informed.

The European industry recently announced that if the results of the consultations were not considered
satisfactory it would immediately lodge a complaint under the Trade Barriers Regulation (TBR) (1). If the
bilateral dialogue fails, this procedure could lead to World Trade Organisation (WTO) action to penalise
the Korean use of subsidies and dumping, and to remedy the situation.

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 3286/94 of 22 December 1994 laying down Community procedures in the field of the
common commercial policy in order to ensure the exercise of the Community(cid:146)s rights under international trade
rules, in particular those established under the auspices of the World Trade Organisation (OJ L 349, 31.12.1994).

(2001/C 136 E/057)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2571/00

by Robert Goebbels (PSE) to the Commission

(1 August 2000)

Subject: Delays in Commission payments

The European Parliament has now given its final agreement to the late payments directive. That directive
will require the private and public sectors to make payments within a time-limit of 30 days, after which
penalty interest will be payable.

Does the Commission not consider it necessary to adopt without delay the principles which it has
successfully proposed for the Member States?

A large number of complaints have been received from private firms, some of which have been awaiting
payment for services provided to the European Union in general, and the Commission in particular, for
several months.

The multiplication of checks and the bureaucracy involved have exacerbated the delays in the Commis-
sion(cid:146)s payments considerably. This applies to all Community programmes (PHARE, TACIS, JOP, ECIP,
JEV, etc.), and some of the firms concerned have had to undergo repeated checks but have still not
received payment from the Commission services pursuant to the funding agreements signed.

(cid:145)Obsessive(cid:146) checks are being carried out, and many senior officials are clearly refusing to shoulder their
responsibility, preferring to cover themselves by repeatedly requesting information, additional justification,
external audits and all the other bureaucratic inventions used as an (cid:145)umbrella(cid:146) to protect the administration.

This atrocious situation has become a nightmare for many private firms working with Commission
services.

Should the Commission not apply the principles which it is seeking to impose on the private sector to its
own services, particularly with regard to administrative simplification, action to combat late payments and
the proper treatment of all files?

Answer given by Ms Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(31 October 2000)

Directive 2000/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 June 2000 on combating late
payment in commercial transactions (1) provides that interest is to become payable from the day following
the date or the end of the period for payment fixed in the contract. If the date or period for payment is
not fixed in the contract, interest is to become payable automatically, without the necessity of a reminder,
30 days following the date of receipt by the debtor of the invoice or an equivalent request for payment.