WRITTEN QUESTION E-3271/00 by Dominique Vlasto (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Single price for books in Europe.
Date: 2000-10-20
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: book trade, imposed price, intra-EU trade

C 151 E/120

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

22.5.2001

The primary responsibility for resolving the situation lies with the government of Indonesia, but the
Community has consistently offered humanitarian assistance. The European Community(cid:146)s Humanitarian
Office (ECHO) has already, since 1999, made available € 4 million in aid, and is preparing to make
available a further € 2 million in the near future.

Over the last few months, and most recently on 10 October 2000, the Community has made a series of
dØmarches in Jakarta. On all those occasions it has urged the government of Indonesia to take action to
halt the violence, and to identify and prosecute those responsible, as well as to ensure unrestricted access
for humanitarian aid and security for those displaced.

A mission of Union ambassadors in Jakarta visited the Moluccas on 12/13 October 2000 in order to assess
the situation on the spot. This visit was an opportunity to highlight Union concerns in discussions with all
parties involved.

(2001/C 151 E/135)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3271/00

by Dominique Vlasto (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(20 October 2000)

Subject: Single price for books in Europe

During the last weekend of September 2000, a symposium on a single price for books in Europe was held
in Strasbourg.

The symposium highlighted the numerous benefits of using such a system for the Member States and their
positive impact on European cultural policy. Unfortunately, this principle has not yet been sanctioned by
the Commission.

In view of
Commission not give practical support to such a symbolic cultural initiative?

the growing number of countries adopting this principle in various forms, should the

This practice is actually being called into question in fact since, although the Commission claims to respect
national law, it is furthering its circumvention through safeguarding online bookshops and the freedom of
commercial outlets opened up by the Internet.

What practical measures does the Commission plan to take to reconcile this variation on the principle of
(cid:145)cultural exception(cid:146) and the principle of not obstructing the free movement of goods and services, and over
what period of time?

How does the Commission explain the presence at the symposium of Mr Monti, the Commissioner
responsible for competition, instead of Mrs Reding, the Commissioner responsible for cultural affairs?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(29 November 2000)

There is no single view among Member States regarding the issue of book pricing, but there is a wide
range of solutions. Even those Member States that form a homogeneous language area with another
Member State are not all in favour of fixed prices for books. Within Member States, and even in publishing
and the distributive sector, opinions as to the merits of the systems of fixed book prices remain divided.

Under these circumstances, it would seem justified to leave it to each Member State to accept or to lay
down, in accordance with Community law, special book pricing arrangements.

National systems of fixed book prices may be based on national legislation or on agreements between
firms or between publishers and booksellers. Different provisions of the EC Treaty will apply. Statutory
systems need to be examined in the light of Article 28 (former Article 30), while agreements between
firms need to be compatible with Article 81 (former Article 85). In both cases, the case law of the Court of
Justice must, of course, be complied with.

22.5.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 151 E/121

As regards statutory systems, any Member State may adopt the relevant legislation provided that it is
compatible with the principle of free movement of goods enshrined in the EC Treaty. This decision is a
matter for the national authorities. In its judgment of 10 January 1985 in Leclerc (Case 229/83 [1985]
ECR 1) concerning French legislation as it stood at the time, the Court of Justice ruled that, in the context
of national
legislation introducing a system of fixed book prices, the following constitute measures
equivalent in effect to import restrictions prohibited by Article 30 (now Article 28) of the EC Treaty:
(cid:145)provisions whereby the importer responsible for complying with the statutory requirement to deposit one
copy of each imported book with the authorities, that is to say the principal distributor, is responsible for
fixing the retail price(cid:146) and (cid:145)provisions requiring the retail price fixed by the publisher to be applied to
books published in the Member State concerned and re-imported following exportation to another
Member State, unless it is established that those books were exported for the sole purpose of re-
importation in order to circumvent the legislation in question(cid:146).

In its judgment of 3 October 2000 in Case C-9/99, the Court of Justice confirmed that Article 3(c) and (g)
of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 3(c) and (g) EC), Articles 3a and 5 of the EC Treaty (now
Articles 4 and 10 EC), the second paragraph of Article 7a of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, the
second paragraph of Article 14 EC) and Articles 102a and 103 of the EC Treaty (now Articles 98 and 99
EC) do not preclude the application of national legislation requiring publishers to impose on booksellers
fixed prices for the resale of books.

The Commission takes the view that national systems of fixed book prices based on agreements between
firms are compatible with the Community competition rules provided that they do not significantly affect
trade between Member States. Article 81 does not apply in such situations.

Pursuant to Article 151(4) of the EC Treaty, the Community takes cultural aspects into account in its
action under other provisions of the Treaty, in particular in order to respect and to promote the diversity
of its cultures.

While not envisaging any practical measures, the Commission will ensure that, in all cases involving the
application of the principles of free movement of goods and services and the rules of competition, any
cultural aspects that arise will be taken into account.

As regards its presence at the symposium on a single price for books in Europe, organised by the French
Presidency on 29 and 30 September in Strasbourg, the Commission was represented by senior officials
from the Directorates-General for Competition and for Education and Culture.

(2001/C 151 E/136)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3288/00

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(25 October 2000)

Subject: Strategic oil reserves

Under Community law, Member States are required to maintain minimum reserves of crude oil and/or oil
products. In order to comply with this Community obligation, the governments of the Member States
require oil companies to maintain at all times a strategic reserve equivalent to ninety days(cid:146) supply. The oil
industry receives compensation from governments for the cost of maintaining the strategic reserve. In
Belgium for example, such compensation is worth approximately BEF 3 billion per annum.

According to press reports, in recent months when oil prices were high the oil industry has sold large
quantities of cheap oil from these strategic reserves at huge profit.

Does the Commission have exact figures on failure to comply with the requirement to keep strategic
reserves and is it considering legislative proposals to (i)
introduce effective penalties for such non-
compliance and (ii) ensure that fuel bought and stored when prices are low cannot be speculatively
released and sold at many times the real, original price, but instead is used to stem the price rise?