WRITTEN QUESTION E-3280/00 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE-DE) to the Commission. European shipbuilding industry.
Date: 2000-10-25
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European undertaking, South Korea, aid to industry, dumping, restriction on competition, shipbuilding, trade restriction

C 163 E/74

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

6.6.2001

The next Monitoring Committee meeting in both regions will take place in December 2000. The agenda
will
include the approval of the annual reports on the implementation of the single programming
documents (SPD) in 1999, detailed information on the progress and implementation of each measure
and discussion of the evaluation reports. Close attention will obviously be paid to the reconstruction
measures required as a result of the earthquake.

With regard to those measures, the Commission would draw the Honourable Member(cid:146)s attention to the
fact that information on the progress report is at present neither exhaustive nor final since assistance under
the SPD does not have to be completed until 31 December 2001.

(2001/C 163 E/078)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3280/00

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

Subject: European shipbuilding industry

(25 October 2000)

In his reply to Written Question E-2568/00 (1), the Commissioner responsible for trade, Mr Lamy, stated
that the consultations held between the EU and Korea in Seoul last July could be said to have proven
relatively fruitful, since they had produced much legal, economic and financial information and documen-
tation and, more precisely, yielded two positive results:

1. Korea will allow the EU to conduct an inquiry into its shipyards, using an antidumping questionnaire
as a basis for ascertaining whether the prices of contracts signed by Korean shipyards are in line with
the (cid:145)normal(cid:146) value established by the provisions of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
(GATT) Antidumping Agreement;

2. The authorities have also agreed to a second round of consultations in September with a view to
reviewing the overall functioning of the agreement, and above all to seeking to resolve the differences
between the two sides.

In spite of this progress, and bearing in mind that the Commission apparently broke off negotiations with
South Korea recently, will the Commission say whether this progress has yielded practical results?

Will it say whether the negotiations have indeed been broken off and, if so, why? Have they been broken
off for good, or will they resume?

Will it confirm that the Koreans have been engaging in unfair practices and detail the impact thereof
practices on the European shipbuilding industry?

Will it say whether it is determined to bring South Korea before the World Trade Organisation (WTO) as
soon as the European shipbuilding industry lodges a complaint under the regulation on obstacles to trade
which must precede any action by the EU in this regard?

Does this situation noe bear out the need to maintain European aid to shipbuilding, especially in
Objective 1 areas, until such time as the situation of unfair competition on the part of Korea has
been fully remedied?

(1) OJ C 136 E, 8.5.2001, p. 50.

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(29 November 2000)

Despite the encouraging results of the meeting in Seoul in July 2000, the Commission(cid:146)s expectations have
been disappointed. The second round of consultations held in Brussels on 28/29 September was
unsuccessful owing to Korea(cid:146)s lack of political will to reach an agreement on an effective and convincing
solution. Korea was unable to implement measures designed to achieve the primary aim of the Agreed
Minutes, namely a rise in prices to commercially viable levels based on (cid:145)normal value(cid:146).

6.6.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 163 E/75

Similarly, the results of visits to Korea by Commission experts were inconclusive. One of the two shipyards
refused to cooperate with the Commission under the pretext of confidentiality. The Commission considers
that the commitment to transparency made by the Koreans (and the shipyards) was not fully respected and
strongly expressed its dissatisfaction to the Korean Government at the second consultation meeting.

A Commission delegation visited Korea on 19 and 20 October 2000 to examine a final Korean proposal
for a compromise. Unfortunately the discussions did not yield a tangible result acceptable to the
Commission.

Against this background, on 24 October 2000 the European industry (Committee of European Union
Shipbuilders Associations) lodged a complaint under the trade barrier regulation (1). The Commission is
examining the complaint and if necessary will open an inquiry, which could lead either to new
negotiations for a satisfactory solution to the bilateral dispute or to the initiation of proceedings before
the World Trade Organisation with a view to sanctioning and halting Korea(cid:146)s practices.

The two reports sent by the Commission to the Council (2) show clearly that Korea is engaging in unfair
trade practices. The next monitoring report to be submitted to the Industry Council in preparation for its
meeting on 5 December 2000 will take stock of the situation.

The Commission is discussing public aid for shipbuilding, as the current mechanism expires on
31 December 2000. In any event Regulation (EC) No 1540/98 (3) provides that other forms of support
for the industry (aid for innovation, research and development aid, regional aid for modernisation and
restructuring aid) remain available to help the Community industry adapt to international competition.

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 3286/94 of 22.12.1994 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 Organization (OJ L 349, 31.12.1994).

(2) COM(1999) 474 final, COM(2000) 263 final.
(3) Council Regulation (CE) No 1540/98 of 29.6.1998 establishing new rules on aids to shipbuilding (OJ L 202,

18.7.1998).

(2001/C 163 E/079)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3281/00

by Mar(cid:237)a Sornosa Mart(cid:237)nez (PSE) to the Commission

(25 October 2000)

Subject: Development project in the protected area of the Peæ(cid:237)scola marshes (Castell(cid:243)n, Spain)

The Spanish Supreme Court recently gave the go-ahead for development work on 50 000 square metres of
the Peæ(cid:237)scola marshes, one of the most important wetlands in the Autonomous Community of Valencia,
which are at last set to be included by the autonomous government (Generalitat) in the catalogue of
wetlands afforded protection by the Natura 2000 network and the LIFE-Nature funds, although the area
covered is far smaller than that originally proposed. The project developer, the Levinsa company,
is
seeking to use some of the marsh area to construct a complex of buildings, some 7 storeys high, which
will undoubtedly harm this protected environment and severely endanger the survival of species living
therein, such as the Valencia hispanica.

Furthermore, it is worth pointing out that the area proposed for protection as currently set out in the
Generalitat(cid:146)s catalogue of wetlands does not cover areas of drained land which at present house sports and
camping facilities. Environmental organisations such as the Association for the Protection of Nature in the
Levante Region and Ecologists in Action, both of which have petitioned the Commission in the past,
believe that speculative interests might lie behind the exclusion of the drained land from the protected
area.