WRITTEN QUESTION P-1593/01 by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Funding for car-parks in Athens under the second and third CSF.
Date: 2001-05-21
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Community support framework, EU financing, Greece, parking area

4.12.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 340 E/241

contracts (1) (hereafter (cid:145)the Directive(cid:146)) depends on whether these contracts are awarded by a (cid:145)contracting
authority(cid:146), most often in the form of a (cid:145)body governed by public law(cid:146) within the meaning of the Directive.

Such bodies are defined as any body:

(cid:129) established for the specific purpose of meeting needs in the general interest, not having an industrial

or commercial character, and

(cid:129) having legal personality, and

(cid:129) financed, for the most part, by the Member State, or regional or local authorities, or other bodies
governed by public law, or subject to management supervision by those bodies, or having an
administrative, managerial or supervisory board, more than half of whose members are appointed by
the Member State, regional or local authorities or by other bodies governed by public law;

Given the legal and financial situation of the Danish Church (Folkekirken), it is clear that it meets the
conditions for being a contracting authority.

As can be seen from the definition, public financing is not necessarily sufficient to bring the receiving
entity within the scope of the Directive; it is necessary to verify that this public financing constitutes the
(cid:145)most part(cid:146), cf. the judgment of 3 October 2000 in Case C-380/98, (cid:145)Cambridge(cid:146). If that condition is not
met, it would still be necessary to verify whether the two other alternative conditions of the definition(cid:146)s
third indent are met.

As regards Germany, the Commission does not have sufficient information to assess whether churches in
Germany are subject to the Directive. This information will be sought and evaluated as soon as possible.

As regards Sweden, it should be noted that the relations between the Swedish State and the Swedish
Church have been changed and that, as a result thereof, the Swedish law on public procurement has
recently been changed to provide that churches are contracting authorities only in respect of purchases
related to their role as burial authorities. This legislative change is being evaluated.

The Commission will keep the Honourable Member informed of the results of these actions.

However, an analysis, based on a search in the relevant database, of tender notices specifically mentioning
the supply (or construction) of organs, whether published by churches or other bodies, shows that a total
of 24 tender notices was published over the period 1995-2000: ten from Finland, four from Denmark,
three from France, two each from Austria and Sweden and one each from Germany, Portugal and the
United Kingdom. Of these 24 notices, nine were published in 2000 (four from Finland, three from
Denmark and one each from France and the United Kingdom). In addition there may have been other
award procedures involving organs, which were not found because the supply of organs was part of, for
instance, an integrated contract for the construction or refurbishment of a church.

(1) OJ L 199, 9.8.1993.

(2001/C 340 E/277)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1593/01

by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(21 May 2001)

Subject: Funding for car-parks in Athens under the second and third CSF

What operations under the second Community Support Framework related to the construction of carparks
in Athens, what was actually achieved by comparison with the original
forecasts, what sums were
antincipated and what actually spent? What plans for the construction of carparks in Athens are covered
by the third CSF?

C 340 E/242

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

4.12.2001

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(21 June 2001)

No carpark construction in Athens has been part-financed under the Community Support Framework
(CSF) for Greece over the 1994-1999 programming period.

As regards the CSF for the current period (2000-2006),
the Greek authorities responsible for the
Operational Programme (OP) for Attica have not yet determined the measures and selection criteria for
projects to be part-financed under the latter.

(2001/C 340 E/278)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1665/01

by Juan Ojeda Sanz (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(1 June 2001)

Subject: Transport of works of art

The transport of works of art is connected with the organisation of public exhibitions and events, and is
therefore subject to public procurement procedures. The Commission is working to end discriminatory
practices that prevent firms from competing for contracts in other Member States. German museums, for
example, have been known to insist that a German firm be responsible for all transport of its works of art,
even where a contract procedure and exhibition take place in Spain. It thus occurs that a Spanish firm may
win a contract in Spain, but the German museums refuse to have their works of art transported by any
firm other than their preferred German firm, thereby refusing to accept the result of a tender procedure
organised in Spain.

Is the Commission aware of the effect of the practice of German museums on public contracts in States
such as Spain? If not, will it devote particular attention to this question in view of the value of the works
transported and with a view to achieving the objectives of the Single Market?

Is it acceptable that a State that respects Community directives on public procurement should have to
accept that German museums and the public authorities that run them should oblige Spanish bidders to
use a German agent? Is it acceptable that the German firm that is the preferred agent should participate in
tender procedures, directly or indirectly?

In view of the need to achieve uniform regulation of the transport of works of art with regard to the
requirements that firms providing these services must fulfil, does the Commission see the need to draw up
a proposal on this question?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(5 July 2001)

The Commission is unaware of any discriminatory practice by German museums with regard to the
transport of works of art.

It will not fail to act on the Honourable Member(cid:146)s request that the competent authorities be questioned on
this matter and that any impact the matter may have on the application of Community law on public
procurement and the freedom to supply services be assessed.

As the Honourable Member points out, both the Community directives on public procurement and
Article 49 (ex Article 59) of the EC Treaty prohibit direct or indirect discrimination based on nationality.