WRITTEN QUESTION E-0923/01 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Public authorities' use of incorrect conversion tables will encourage inflation when the euro is introduced.
Date: 2001-03-28
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Netherlands, euro, fine, inflation, price increase, price stability

C 340 E/126

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

4.12.2001

As regards the concession system and its impact on rebalancing transport between road and rail, the
3.
Commission would remind the Honourable Member of its answer to Question E-0371/01, namely that the
Commission generally considers it preferable to make direct users bear the cost of using the particular
infrastructure and that it is examining measures which could contribute to a rebalancing of transport
between road and rail in the Community, particularly measures concerning the system of charging for the
use of infrastructure and infrastructure financing.

(1) OJ L 199, 9.8.1993.

(2001/C 340 E/143)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0923/01

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(28 March 2001)

Subject: Public authorities(cid:146) use of incorrect conversion tables will encourage inflation when the euro is

introduced

1.
Is the Commission aware that it has been the Dutch government(cid:146)s intention since February 2000 to
increase fines (which have remained at the same level since 1981) by 10,19 % with effect from 2000 and
that this increase is to be simplified by replacing every two guilders (cid:129) together worth € 0,90756 (cid:129) by one
whole euro?

2.
Does the Commission know of any other examples of authorities of, or within, a Member State
intending to use the introduction of the euro on 1 January 2002 to increase their tariffs or fines by using
a conversion table different to the one officially fixed in late 1998 for the comparative values of existing
currencies and the euro?

Does the Commission agree that the use by dealers of the euro logo agreement, which it called for in
3.
its reply to Question E-4066/00 (1), could be at risk if governments give the impression that they want to
increase their revenue when the euro is introduced?

4.
Is the Commission prepared to help ensure that any price increases deemed desirable by governments
are only implemented at a time when prices before and after the increase are expressed in the same
currency, so that
to everyone as a decision taken consciously and completely
they are apparent
independently of the introduction of a new unit of currency?

5. What other steps is the Commission planning to take to prevent government policy contributing in
any way to the massive inflation which is feared will occur on 1 January 2002, and which the
Commission explicitly denied would happen in its answer to Question E-4066/00?

(1) OJ C 187 E, 3.7.2001, p. 125.

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(14 June 2001)

1.
The possibility of increasing fines in the Netherlands through the changeover to the euro, after initial
consideration, has been discarded by the Dutch authorities. The conversion will leave values unaltered or
marginally modify them, in the conversion process, strictly to the advantage of the public.

2. and 3. Most public authorities of euro area Member States commit themselves to setting a positive
example by organising the changeover of their tariffs in a neutral manner, requested among others by
European Federations in the agreement on good practices signed on 2 April 2001. Wherever the exact
value in conversion cannot be maintained the conversion process will always be to the advantage of the
public.

Price increase which normally take place at the beginning of the year will be introduced at the usual

4.
times. The introduction of the euro will not disrupt what are usual practices and deadlines.

4.12.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 340 E/127

The Commission has proposed, in its Communication of 3 April 2001 (1), several lines of action
5.
discussed and pursued with euro area Member States and European trade federations. These include:
encouraging the adoption of dual pricing, increasing the frequency of price surveys and checks in late
2001 and early 2002, creating a commitment to overall stability (pursued among others through the
agreement of 2 April 2001), building on the example set by the public administrations and organising
specific price surveys to monitor trends in prices.

(1) COM(2001) 190 final.

(2001/C 340 E/144)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0924/01

by Jorge Moreira Da Silva (PPE-DE) to the Council

(29 March 2001)

Subject: Directive on renewable energy sources

At the Kyoto Conference the European Union undertook to ensure that, between 2008 and 2012,
greenhouse-gas emissions would be reduced by 8 % by comparison with 1990 levels. However, such
emissions have in fact increased in most of the Member States and the situation is so serious that the EEA
(European Environment Agency) has recently forecast that by 2010 there will have been a 6 % increase in
EU greenhouse-gas emissions.

In February of this year the IPCC (International Panel on Climate Change) put forward positively alarming
forecasts regarding the impact which greenhouse-gas emissions could have on climate change, namely that
by 2100 the Earth(cid:146)s temperature could increase by over 5 (cid:176)C.

In 2000 the Commission submitted a Green Paper which lays the foundations of a European scheme for
trading in emission rights. The undeniable advantage of this scheme (which is to come into effect in 2005)
is that it will use the rules of the market in order to bring about a reduction in greenhouse-gas emissions
at a very low cost (cid:129) although the European Union has always rightly maintained that flexible instruments
(in particular trading in emission rights) are intended as an adjunct to policies and measures which are to
be given absolute priority (cid:129) the most important of these being the promotion of renewable energy
sources.

The Commission recently submitted a directive which sets quantified targets for the promotion of
renewable energy sources. Despite the soundness of this initiative, some of the Member States are currently
questioning the need for those targets to be made mandatory.

Meeting the targets laid down in the Directive on renewable energy sources would take the European
Union halfway to meeting the Kyoto commitments.

In the view of the above, would the Council answer the following questions:

1. What is the position of Portugal vis-(cid:224)-vis the targets laid down in the Directive on renewable energy
is one of the countries which have recorded the largest increases in

sources (given that Portugal
greenhouse-gas emissions)?

2. On the eve of what will be very difficult negotiations at the COP6a meeting, what would be the
political impact of any decision to make the targets laid down in the Directive on renewable energy
sources mandatory?

Reply

(16 July 2001)

With regard to the first question put forward by the Honourable Member, it must be stated that the
Council does not, as a matter of principle, comment on the positions of individual Member States.