WRITTEN QUESTION E-4127/00 by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Commission. Recovery of competitiveness for certain mountain areas.
Date: 2001-01-11
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: State aid, control of State aid, economic disparity, mountain region, regional aid, regional disparity, restriction on competition, tourism, tourist infrastructure

21.8.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 235 E/75

(2001/C 235 E/080)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4122/00

by Joachim Wuermeling (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(11 January 2001)

Subject: Tobacco products directive

The new tobacco products directive will shortly be coming before the Conciliation Committee. One of the
subjects at issue will be the content and size of health warnings. In one EU Member State the sale of
certain drugs in small quantities is not subject to criminal prosecution.

1.

2.

Is the Commission aware that the drugs being sold do not carry health warnings?

Does it intend to make provision for health warnings for these products?

3. Would there be an EU legal basis for doing so?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(8 March 2001)

Drug policy and drug legislation in the Union are areas of shared competence between the Community
and the Member States. All Member States have ratified the three United Nations Conventions (from years
1961, 1971 and 1988) that provide a common framework for drug legislation throughout the Union.
European Councils have also endorsed the Union drugs strategy (2000-2004) in Helsinki (1999) and the
Union action plan on drugs (2000-2004) (1) in Santa Maria da Feira (2000). These provide a common
framework for all drug-related actions in the Union.

The Union action plan on drugs encourages the Member States to find new and effective ways in drug
prevention and reduction of drug related harm. These activities are also funded through the Community
programme on drug prevention that has just been extended for two years.

The Member States retain the right to certain flexibility on the national implementation of their EC Treaty
obligations and ways to achieve the goals set in the Union action plan on drugs. Therefore, as the
Honourable Member rightly points out, the possession and sale of small amounts of certain drugs does not
always lead to criminal punishment even though the drugs themselves and trade in large quantities may be
considered illegal. The Commission has the following answers to the specific questions made by the
Honourable Member.

1. and 2.
Unlike tobacco products and other legal products, illicit drugs are not covered by Community
legislation on the Internal Market. In case a Member State allows the small-scale supply of these drugs,
decisions on any health warnings fall under its competence.

3.

There are no legal bases for Community rules on health warnings on illicit drugs.

(1) COM(1999) 239 final.

(2001/C 235 E/081)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4127/00

by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Commission

Subject: Recovery of competitiveness for certain mountain areas

(11 January 2001)

Article 88(3) of the Treaty on European Union stipulates that (cid:145)the Commission shall be informed, in
sufficient time to enable it to submit its comments, of any plans to grant or alter aid(cid:146). The purpose of this

C 235 E/76

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

21.8.2001

is to check whether a project is compatible with the common market, under the terms of Article 87.
Paragraph 3(c) of that article states that (cid:145)aid to facilitate the development of certain economic activities or
of certain economic areas, where such aid does not adversely affect trading conditions to an extent
contrary to the common interest(cid:146), may be considered compatible with the common market. Clearly, the aid
granted to certain mountain areas as an incentive to the hotel
industry or to modernise mountain
transport facilities at rates far in excess (70-80 %) of those authorised under the Treaty of Amsterdam is
bound to affect trading conditions (in terms of tourist services) in relation to other mountain areas which
receive aid at rates of 7,5 % in the case of
large companies or 15 % for small and medium-sized
undertakings. This difference in conditions significantly reduces the competitiveness of areas which comply
with the rules on state aids in relation to those that do not.

Is the Commission aware of specific cases of the above and what is its view on the matter? Does it not
consider that areas which comply with the Treaty provisions on aid have become less competitive and
have lost direct to areas or regions which have illegally received aid in excess of the amounts authorised? If
so, what measures does it intend to take to restore balanced competition and what measures will
it
promote to offset the loss of competitiveness of areas which have suffered as a result of this problem?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(6 March 2001)

The Commission is currently examining several complaints relating to state aid granted to mechanical lift
firms. For example, a complaint lodged by the Province of Bolzano against state aid that had been granted
led to the initiation on 4 August 2000 of the procedure under Article 88(2) (formerly Article 93) of the
EC Treaty (1).

The Commission is not aware of aid other than that mentioned having been granted in connection with
hotel structures or mechanical lift infrastructures and not comply with the Community rules on state aid.

It would, however, be grateful if the Honourable Member would communicate to it any information that
would allow it to raise the matter at the earliest opportunity with the Member State or States concerned on
the basis of Chapter III (Procedure regarding unlawful aid) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 659/1999 of
22 March 1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 88 of the EC Treaty (2).

The Community state aid rules specify precise aid ceilings: those for regional aid differ according to
whether the region falls within Article 87(3)(a) or (c) (formerly Article 92) and whether it is a (cid:145)normal(cid:146)
region, an (cid:145)outermost(cid:146) region or a region (cid:145)with low population density(cid:146) (cf. guidelines on national regional
aid); the aid ceilings for small and medium-sized enterprises are 15 % and 7,5 % respectively. Compliance
with these rules safeguards competition between firms in different regions or areas.

If the Commission finds that state aid is incompatible with the EC Treaty, is unlawful or does not comply
with the ceilings set, it may decide that, in order to restore the conditions of competition, a Member State
should take all the measures necessary to recover the aid from the recipient.

(1) OJ C 27, 27.1.2001.
(2) OJ L 83, 27.3.1999.