WRITTEN QUESTION P-1529/01 by Alexander Radwan (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Assistance for areas along the borders with applicant countries.
Date: 2001-05-15
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Central and Eastern Europe, State aid, competition, frontier region, type of business

C 340 E/234

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

4.12.2001

(2001/C 340 E/270)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1528/01

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(21 May 2001)

Subject: Pilot study by Eurostat

A press release issued by Eurostat refers to a pilot study it carried out on the economic impact of firms
under foreign control, which did not include Portugal.

Can the Commission say:

1. Why Portugal was not included in the study?

2. Whether another study is envisaged to include the Community countries which were not covered by
the pilot study already carried out?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(5 July 2001)

The press release concerns the second phase of the pilot study on the economic impact of firms under
(FATS (cid:129) Foreign Affiliates Trade Statistics). Participation in such pilot studies is on
foreign control
a voluntary basis. Due to other priorities, the National Statistics Institute (INE) (Portugal) had decided not
to participate in the first and the second phase of the pilot study. However, INE (Portugal) will participate
in the third phase of the pilot study together with Denmark, Spain, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the
Netherlands, Finland, Sweden and the United Kingdom. Data on reference year 1999 are expected to be
delivered to the Statistical Office of the European Communities (Eurostat) by the end of 2001. As a result,
Portugal will be covered in the statistics on FATS to be released in 2002.

(2001/C 340 E/271)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1529/01

by Alexander Radwan (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(15 May 2001)

Subject: Assistance for areas along the borders with applicant countries

Under Article 87 of the Treaty on European Union, any aid granted by a Member State or through State
resources which distorts competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods
shall be incompatible with the common market.

However, with the enlargement of the EU eastwards the major regional wage and salary differentials will
lead to serious economic adjustment problems in the areas bordering on the applicant countries, affecting
in particular the craft sector, small and medium-sized businesses and the self-employed. These problems
could be alleviated by means of a special programme of assistance for the border areas in question.

Some time ago, the Commissioner responsible for enlargement indicated that Member States and regions
would accordingly be given greater latitude than is currently the case (for example, under the (cid:145)de minimis(cid:146)
provisions) to provide assistance for border areas.

Have specific proposals, definitions and/or projects been put forward in the Commission and if so, what
are they? If not, how does the Commission intend to resolve this problem? When is a decision likely to be
made?

4.12.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 340 E/235

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(3 July 2001)

The Commission is elaborating a Communication on the impact of enlargement on regions bordering
candidate countries and envisaged Community actions. This Communication, which was called for by the
European Councils of Nice of December 2000 and G(cid:246)teborg of June 2001, and which was supported by
the Parliament, will analyse the economic situation of the Community(cid:146)s border regions. The Commission
will, on the basis of this analysis, put forward proposals on how to optimise existing instruments and how
to ensure better co-ordination in order to strengthen the economic competitiveness of frontier regions.

The existing regulations, guidelines and frameworks concerning State aid control, notably the Guidelines
on national regional aid (1) and the Commission Regulations (EC) No 69/2001 of 12 January 2001 on the
application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to de minimis aid (2) and (EC) No 70/2001 of
12 January on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to State aid to small and medium-
sized enterprises (2) already offer a wide range of possibilities to Member States to award aid in order to
diminish the impact of the type of problems described by the Honourable Member.

(1) OJ C 74, 10.3.1998; amended in OJ C 258, 9.9.2000.
(2) OJ L 10, 13.1.2001.

(2001/C 340 E/272)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1532/01

by Luciana Sbarbati (ELDR) to the Commission

(15 May 2001)

Subject: Safety at work

According to Eurostat (on 31 March 2000) between 1994 and 1996 the risks of accidents at work in the
EU fell by 7 % (fatal accidents by 13 %), men are three times more likely to have accidents than women
and firms with more than 250 employees are safer. In 1998 there were 4,7 million accidents, 5 476 of
them fatal. According to these estimates the annual costs in the EU (medical expenses, sick pay and
compensation paid for permanent invalidity or death) total nearly € 20 billion, not to mention the social
costs of accidents (assistance, rehabilitation and reintegration into employment, where possible, etc.). In
Italy alone an average of three people die at work every day (not counting domestic accidents, those not
reported because people are working unofficially and road accidents involving people who travel in the
course of their work).

The European Agency for Health and Safety at Work is trying to show that the introduction of provisions
in these areas may help to improve the working environment and reduce the costs of compulsory
insurance which firms are obliged to take out to show that safety pays.

Can the Commission say whether in addition to the EU(cid:146)s legislative role (cid:129) to offer workers social
protection and employers economic protection (cid:129) it might be appropriate to step up its non-legislative role
by publishing information material, promoting comparative studies and providing better training for
workers and employers?

The European Week for Safety and Health at Work to be held in autumn at the end of an information
campaign involving all the Member States, the Commission and Parliament, trade unions and employers(cid:146)
organisations may be a good start.

Does the Commission not consider that it is wrong to accept different minimum safety levels in different
Member States or in firms of different sizes? If one understood exactly what the competences of the EU
and of the Member States are, the Community(cid:146)s objectives would be better defined and the compliance
with them required of the Member States could be regulated by periodic inspections and checks to be
carried out by the competent authorities.