WRITTEN QUESTION P-3457/00 by Marit Paulsen (ELDR) to the Commission. Commission office in Stockholm.
Date: 2000-10-30
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Commission, Sweden, dismissal, fraud against the EU, regulations for civil servants, servant (EU)

6.6.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 163 E/127

and structural surpluses have built up in some sectors. From that point of view, the CAP has been a victim
of its own success. A series of reforms have been undertaken in order to adjust the CAP in line with
developments in the markets, the countryside and society. In the 1980s, measures were adopted to limit
surpluses and have more control over supply. At the same time, rural development measures were
rethought and consolidated so as to provide better back-up for agriculture(cid:146)s structural adjustment. In the
1990s a major new step was taken in the reform process, with the reduction in support prices being offset
by introducing direct aid and back-up measures (cid:129) including agri-environmental measures and early
retirement aid. This trend continued with Agenda 2000 and has been supplemented by new mechanisms,
in particular the modulation of direct aid. Moreover, rural development has become the second pillar of
the CAP, and a number of measures (cid:129) in particular the agri-environmental scheme (cid:129) have been
enhanced.

2.
According to the Commission(cid:146)s analyses, the Netherlands is among the top three in terms of average
income per agricultural worker (measured as net value added at factor cost). Admittedly, the average
income of farmers (cid:129) and particularly stock farmers (cid:129) in the Netherlands fell in 1998 and 1999. This was
mainly caused by the drop in the price of pigmeat, beef and veal, and by the consequences of the
epidemics which affected the sectors concerned; the same effects were also felt in other Member States.
However,
income increased significantly in the Netherlands
(by 22 % between 1993 and 1997) as in most other Member States.

in preceding years average agricultural

3.
The Commission thanks the Honourable Member for providing a copy of the article to which he
refers. It is interesting both for its analysis of the development of Dutch agriculture and for the options
examined. The share accounted for by specialised production (cid:129) in particular fruit and vegetables and
horticultural products (cid:129) has increased sharply, while livestock products(cid:146) share has fallen. However, milk
and beef and veal (cid:129) which receive considerable direct support under the CAP (cid:129) still account for almost
30 % of the Netherlands(cid:146) final agricultural production. The comparison of (cid:145)mono-intensive(cid:146) with (cid:145)multi-
extensive(cid:146)
farmers is interesting. Promoting the (cid:145)multi-extensive(cid:146) model reflects the multifunctional
agriculture objective pursued in the CAP, particularly through the rural development pillar.

4.
Protection at the border and the guaranteed price system result in European market prices being
maintained above reference prices on world markets. The reduction in guaranteed prices and the increase
in direct aid make support for agriculture more transparent and more evident. Direct aid represents an
It also offsets the cost of activities which are connected with
important part of
in particular the contribution to regional
agricultural production but not paid for by the market,
development and maintenance of the countryside.
In return, environmental requirements have been
introduced and Member States may make aid conditional on compliance with such requirements.

farmers(cid:146)

income.

5.
There is unlikely to be a significant and lasting increase in the price of basic agricultural products.
Instead, the long-term trend in real terms is downward. But that does not preclude certain foodstuffs(cid:146) value
added from increasing, in particular those whose characteristics meet consumer requirements. The CAP
does not relieve farmers of their responsibility to take consumer needs into account. The reforms
undertaken in the 1990s were specifically designed to make agriculture more market-oriented, while
encouraging farmers to meet the new demands not only of consumers but of society as a whole. Support
granted under the common organisation of markets and in the rural development context must likewise
evolve in keeping with society(cid:146)s requirements.

(2001/C 163 E/142)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3457/00

by Marit Paulsen (ELDR) to the Commission

(30 October 2000)

Subject: Commission office in Stockholm

From the outset the Office of the Commission Representation in Stockholm has seen a succession of
scandals, most recently the method of dealing with the financial irregularities which occurred there over a
lengthy period. Four local staff have recently lost their jobs because of these irregularities, but the senior
officials either remain at their posts in the office or have been moved on to better ones.

C 163 E/128

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

6.6.2001

This is an outrageous state of affairs. The responsibility of the senior staff has to be clarified before any
subordinate staff are dismissed.

It is almost a year since the then head of the Office of the Commission Representation in Sweden was
reassigned within the Commission. Despite the time that has elapsed the Commission has been unable to
pull itself together and appoint a new person to be responsible for its activities. This is most disturbing.

In two months(cid:146) time Sweden will take over the Presidency of the European Union. There is a considerable
risk that none of these problems will have been resolved by then. If so, the Swedish Presidency will be
severely affected by the Commission(cid:146)s clumsy handling of the situation.

Can the Commission answer the following:

(cid:129) Why did the Commission decide to dismiss subordinate staff before establishing the responsibility of

the senior officials?

(cid:129) When does the Commission expect that the report to establish and publish the exact course of events

and the overall responsibility will be made accessible to the public?

(cid:129) When will the Office of the Commission Representation in Stockholm be up to strength and have a

fully-fledged head?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(14 December 2000)

On the basis of the findings of the investigation carried out into the Commission Representation in
Sweden by the Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), and after first hearing the persons involved in strict accordance
with the rights of defence, the Commission decided to dismiss without notice four members of the local
staff of the Stockholm Representation. The individual dismissal decisions were taken in full compliance
with all the provisions of Swedish law applicable in this area, and with the specific conditions of
employment applicable to local staff in Sweden. The persons concerned also have the right to appeal
against the decisions, in accordance with Swedish law.

Parallel disciplinary proceedings are currently under way against certain officials in relation to the same
case. The only reason why the proceedings have not moved at the same pace is because the two categories
of staff do not have the same status and different legal provisions therefore apply. While the proceedings
against the local staff are wholly subject to Swedish law (cid:129) which imposes very strict time limits within
which the employer must act (cid:129) the proceedings with respect to officials are governed by the rules in the
Staff Regulations of officials of the European Communities. Any differences in form between the two
procedures in no way affect the rights of defence of those involved and result in no discriminatory
treatment as regards the merits of the case either of the local staff or of the officials concerned.

The allegation that senior officials who may have been responsible in this affair have been moved on to
better jobs is entirely without foundation.

In accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1073/1999 (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of
25 May 1999 concerning investigations conducted by OLAF, the investigation report was sent to the
Commission and to the Swedish judicial authorities. The information communicated and obtained in this
context is subject to professional secrecy and may not be passed on to persons other than those within the
Community institutions or in the Member States whose duties require them to know it, nor may it be used
for purposes other than to combat fraud and corruption.

The Commission is unable to give an exact date for the outcome of the investigations into this matter.
However, the disciplinary proceedings that are in progress are due to be completed around the spring of
2001. The Commission will duly inform Parliament in accordance with the rules in force.

6.6.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 163 E/129

On the question of the management and the organisation of the Commission(cid:146)s Representation in Sweden,
it should first of all be pointed out that the Stockholm Representation has an acting head for the time
being and that this person has performed very creditably in a job which is particularly difficult given the
present circumstances. Furthermore, as the Commission has already informed the Honourable Members in
its answer to Oral Question H-741/00 by Mr Sj(cid:246)stedt at the October I part-session (2), the procedure for
recruitment of a new Head of Representation is currently in its closing stages. The Commission will
appoint an official to the post before the end of 2000, strictly in accordance with the rules applicable in
this matter, and will at all events ensure that the forthcoming Swedish Presidency of the Union will be able
to rely fully on the contribution of the Commission(cid:146)s Representation in Sweden.

(1) OJ L 136, 31.5.1999.
(2) Debates of the European Parliament (October I 2000).

(2001/C 163 E/143)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3458/00

by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

Subject: Special regional planning studies for the Cyclades

(8 November 2000)

At the end of the 1980s, special teams of scientists were given the task, under the Envireg and MOP
(multifund operational programme) Community programmes, of drafting (cid:145)special regional planning studies(cid:146)
on the development, land use and environmental protection of the Cyclades islands. However, allegations
and protests have revealed that some of these studies have not yet been completed, and many others
which have been completed have not been legally ratified by the publication of presidential decrees to
enable them to be used.

It is clear from communication 1037/18.7.2000 by the State Secretary for the Environment, Regional
Planning and Public Works that Greece seems to be making choices that are at odds with the legal
provisions of the special regional planning studies. One direct result of this obstructionism is that the
major problems concerning the environment, development and the economy faced on a daily basis by the
sensitive island ecosystems of the Cyclades have not been solved and are in fact worsening, while land
development is increasing apace.

In view of the particular wish of both the Commission and the Council for a Community strategy for the
integrated management and development of coastal areas, based on the principles of long-term sustain-
ability and sound environmental practice, could the Commission say, since it has co-financed the studies,
why the studies have not been legally ratified by the publication of corresponding presidential decrees,
although many of them have already been completed, why Greece is making choices other than those put
forward by the special regional planning studies, as demonstrated by the replies of the Ministry of the
Environment, Regional Planning and Public Works, and whether the relevant sanctions have been imposed
on all those who have not completed the studies within the required time, as has emerged from various
allegations?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(18 December 2000)

The Commission is aware of the slowness with which the Greek authorities have been implementing the
(cid:145)special regional planning studies(cid:146) and has raised this point on several occasions within the Monitoring
Committees supervising the operational programmes under which they have been part-financed.

The Greek authorities have made no secret of the delays in practical application of these studies, the
explanation repeatedly given being the complexity of the legal and administrative procedures for their
implementation.