WRITTEN QUESTION E-4040/00 by Sérgio Sousa Pinto (PSE) to the Commission. Competition policy ‐ abuse of dominant position.
Date: 2000-12-21
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: air transport, carrier, competition, dominant position, economic concentration

3.7.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 187 E/117

The Commission has no further information about the underlying facts of the allegations raised by the
Honourable Member and is therefore not able to make a final assessment of whether or not there has been
an infringement of Community law.

Given that Germany and the Netherlands have properly incorporated into their national law the provisions
of the relevant Directives (1), the Commission wants to underline, that any issues arising in this area are in
the first instance a matter for the national industrial relations(cid:146) procedures, and/or the national courts.

The letter from the Mayor of Hengelo was answered on 10 January 2001 by Directorate general for
Competition. A reply from Directorate general for Enterprise is presently under preparation.

(1) Council Directive 98/59/EC of 20 June 1998 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to
collective redundancies (OJ L 225, 12.8.1998); Council Directive 77/187/EEC of 14 February 1977 on the
approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the safeguarding employees(cid:146) rights in the event of
transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of businesses (OJ L 161, 5.3.1977); Council Directive 94/45/EC of
22 September 1994 on the establishment of an European Works Council or a procedure in Community-scale
undertakings and Community-scale groups of undertakings for the purposes of informing and consulting employees
(OJ L 254, 30.9.1994).

(2001/C 187 E/124)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4040/00

by SØrgio Sousa Pinto (PSE) to the Commission

(21 December 2000)

Subject: Competition policy (cid:129) abuse of dominant position

Can the Commission provide information on the market position and practices of the Qualifyer Group of
airlines (a grouping of the following airlines: Swissair, Sabena, TAP Air Portugal, AOM French Airlines,
Crossair, Air Littoral, Air Europe, LOT Polish Airlines, PGA PortugÆlia Airlines, Volare Airlines and Air
LibertØ, which is administered by Qualifyer Loyalty Ltd)?

Citizens and consumers have extremely good reasons to fear confirmation of the presumptions that this
business group is abusing its dominant position, thus giving rise to higher fares, less choice of services and
unfair trading conditions, notably in the case of the Brussels/Lisbon-Porto route. These potentially abusive
and anti-competitive practices may prove to be contrary, in particular, to Article 82 of the EC Treaty.

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(27 February 2001)

The Qualiflyer group is an alliance between airlines, characterised by the fact that the SAirGroup, Swissair(cid:146)s
parent company, has a policy of investing in the capital of certain other airlines in the alliance. In many
cases, such participation gives the SAirGroup joint control, together with other shareholders, of the airline
in which it invested. (cid:145)Qualiflyer Loyalty Ltd.(cid:146) is the company that administers the common frequent-flyer
programme of the participating airlines, but it does not manage the Qualiflyer group.

The Commission has taken a position on transactions whereby the SAirGroup acquired joint control over
other Qualiflyer group airlines. In 1995, the Commission adopted a decision (1) declaring the Swissair/
Sabena concentration compatible with the common market. In 1999, the Commission adopted a decision
approving the acquisition of AOM by the SAirGroup and Mar(cid:237)ne-Wendel, a French financial holding
company. In 2000, the Commission authorised the AOM/Air LibertØ/Air Littoral concentration.

C 187 E/118

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.7.2001

The Commission has also recently examined the compatibility with Article 81 (ex Article 85) of the
EC Treaty of the agreements concluded among the Qualiflyer group airlines.
In February 2000, the
Commission sent a warning letter to five Qualiflyer group airlines (Swissair, TAP, Sabena, Crossair and
AOM), following which these companies ceased to coordinate prices within the Community and on the
routes between the Community and Switzerland.

Competition concerns under Articles 81 and/or 82 (ex Article 86) of the EC Treaty are more likely to arise
on (cid:145)overlap(cid:146) routes, that is, on routes operated by two Qualiflyer group airlines with their respective hubs
at each end of the route, such as the Brussels-Lisbon route. Given this situation, the Commission would
appreciate receiving any information that the Honourable Member may have on a potential abuse of
a dominant position or on other anti-competitive practices on this route.

On other routes, such as the routes to and from various French cities operated by AOM, Air LibertØ and
Air Littoral, the Qualiflyer group airlines compete with the traditional flag carrier.

The Portuguese government announced its intention to sell a stake in TAP some time ago. However, the
Commission has not been notified of any such operation.

(1) OJ L 239, 7.10.1995.

(2001/C 187 E/125)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4044/00

by Theresa Villiers (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(21 December 2000)

Subject: Refurbishment of President Prodi(cid:146)s office

Following the recent refurbishment of President Prodi(cid:146)s office in Rue Breydel, could the Commission

1.
please state if this was paid for by the Commission or some other source?

If the Commission paid for this refurbishment, could the Commission please indicate (a) the total

2.
cost of the refurbishment, and (b) the budget item to which the expenditure was charged?

If the Italiatn Government has loaned items for the refurbishment, could the Commission please
3.
indicate (a) the rules governing loans from governments to the Commission, given that Commissioners are
no longer servants of their country, and (b) whether these items have been declared by President Prodi.

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(22 February 2001)

1.
The Commission at the arrival of the new College of Commissioners established a budget of € 25 000
for the refurbishing of each Commissioner(cid:146)s office with new furniture. Nevertheless instead of using the
€ 25 000 for the acquisition of new furniture, President Prodi(cid:146)s office has recently been refurbished with
antique furniture, on a free of charge loan from the Galleria Nazionale di Arte Antica in Rome.

2.
The Commission only paid the transportation and insurance for the loaned furniture, using budget
line A02353 for the transport and budget line A02350 for the insurance. In consequence, President Prodi
did not use the € 25 000 budget earmarked for the refurbishing of his office.

3.
There are no specific rules governing loans from governments to the Commission. The loan from the
Galleria Nazionale di Arte Antica was accorded to Mr Prodi as President of the European Commission for
the duration of his mandate for the refurbishment of his official office at the Commission and Mr Prodi
has declared these items in the appropriate way.