WRITTEN QUESTION E-2520/00 by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission. Transparency of State aids.
Date: 2000-08-02
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Germany, Saxony, South West (England), United Kingdom, coal industry, control of State aid, intra-EU trade, job cuts, regional aid, tax incentive, transfer of businesses

3.4.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 103 E/171

Answer given by Mrs Wallstr(cid:246)m on behalf of the Commission

(14 September 2000)

impact
Plans are not within the scope of application of the Community directives on environmental
assessment (EIA) (Council Directive 85/337/EEC (1) of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of
certain public and private projects on the environment and Directive 97/11/EC (2), amending Directive 85/
337/EEC). However, as stated by the Court of Justice, in the framework of an EIA procedure possible
cumulative effects of different projects should be sufficiently taken into account.

On the basis of Council Directive 90/313/EEC (3) of 7 June 1990 on the freedom of access to information
on the environment, public authorities are required to make information relating to the environment
available to any natural or legal person at his request and without his having to prove an interest (Article
3, paragraph 1). A public authority is obliged to respond to a person requesting information as soon as
possible and at the latest within two months. The reasons for a refusal to provide the information
requested must be given (Article 3, paragraph 4). A person who considers that his request for information
has been unreasonably refused or ignored, or has been inadequately answered by a public authority, may
seek a judicial or administrative review of the decision in accordance with the relevant national legal
system (Article 4). This directive was transposed in Italy by (cid:145)decreto legislativo 24 febbraio 1997 n. 39
sulla libert(cid:224) di accesso alle informazioni in materia di ambiente(cid:146).

As for the question of the appropriateness of public participation in the decision-making process, the
Commission welcomes the public taking part in decisions by which it is concerned.

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.
(2) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997.
(3) OJ L 158, 23.6.1990.

(2001/C 103 E/196)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2520/00

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(2 August 2000)

Subject: Transparency of State aids

in his answer to my question E-1338/00 (1)

(cid:145)Transfer of jobs from the United
Commissioner Monti
Kingdom to Germany due to tax credits(cid:146) stated that (cid:145)it is important not to overestimate the importance
of aid in firms(cid:146) decisions. Although aid may affect a choice of a new location, it is much more doubtful
that it has a decisive influence on a decision to close or reduce the existing one(cid:146). I would have to doubt
Commissioner Monti(cid:146)s assertion. If state aid is so ineffective, logically Member States would stop offering
these inducements to attract jobs and industry into their regions. However there seems to be little evidence
that in the absence of Community pressure the volume of state aid has diminished.

Is the Commission claiming that the DM seven billion subsidy to the German coal industry has had no
impact on jobs and industry? More importantly, my constituents whose jobs have been lost with the
transfer of the work to Germany will be more concerned that the motivation was influenced by the
rumoured German tax credits.

Will the Commission confirm whether such tax credits were given out or not? If they cannot provide this
information how can they possibly draw any conclusion as to the motivation behind the decision?

(1) OJ C 53 E, 20.2.2001.

C 103 E/172

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.4.2001

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(27 September 2000)

The Commission(cid:146)s previous answer to the Honourable Member(cid:146)s written question E-1338/00 (1) did not
state or mean to imply that aid is ineffective. It is clear that state aid can help to attract investment projects
to a particular area, and this is why the Commission allows higher levels of aid in less developed areas of
the Community (such as Saxony, where the investment of concern to the Honourable Member is located).
Indeed, one reason for state aid control is to ensure that aid offered in these regions is not outbid by
others which do not have the same handicaps. As for aid to the German coal industry, the Honourable
Member is correct to suggest that without such aid the sector would be in the most severe difficulties.

Concerning overall volume of aid, the Commission has noted, most recently in the eighth survey of state
aid (2), a continuing decline but has also stressed the importance of maintaining this current overall
downward trend.

In the case to which the Honourable Member refers, the Commission has enquired and has been informed
by the German authorities that no decision on an individual award of aid has yet been made. However,
under the Investitionszulage and Gemeinschaftsaufgabe schemes, and in conformity with the Community(cid:146)s
regional aid guidelines, the Commission has authorised Germany to grant certain aid to investment in the
form of tax credits and grants in order to allow the authorities at Federal and L(cid:228)nder level to promote
investment, in particular in the less developed areas of Germany, including the New L(cid:228)nder. Individual
cases which conform to the Commission(cid:146)s authorisation would not normally be the subject of an
individual notification or information to the Commission.

(1) OJ C 53 E, 20.2.2001.
(2) COM(2000) 205 final.

(2001/C 103 E/197)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2523/00

by Jonas Sj(cid:246)stedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(2 August 2000)

Subject: European Topic Centre for Nature Conservation and the Habitats Directive

How does the Commission intend to ensure that the comprehensive scientific expertise required at
European level through the ETC/NC is delivered to achieve the objectives of the Habitats Directive and
the Natura 2000 sites selection process?

Further, in relation to the implementation of the Habitats Directive in accession countries, how will the
Commission ensure that an increased scientific expertise at European level is available to meet the needs of
enlargement, for example via the Phare topic link in Bratislava?

Answer given by Mrs Wallstr(cid:246)m on behalf of the Commission

(25 September 2000)

The Commission shares the Honourable Member(cid:146)s view that comprehensive expertise is indispensable for
selection of the Natura 2000 sites and that this also applies to the accession countries.

At the time of renewal of the contract of the European Topic Centre for Nature Conservation, the
Commission urged the European Environment Agency to give priority and allocate sufficient human
resources to Natura 2000 activities in the task description for the Topic Centre.

The Commission hopes that the other members of the Agency(cid:146)s Management Board,
members designated by the European Parliament, will support this priority.

including the