WRITTEN QUESTION E-1538/01 by Daniel Hannan (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Vehicle imports (UK).
Date: 2001-05-22
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: United Kingdom, application of EU law, consumer price, consumer protection, driving mechanism, fixing of prices, motor vehicle industry

C 350 E/182

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

11.12.2001

(2001/C 350 E/196)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1536/01

by John McCartin (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(22 May 2001)

Subject: Independent TV broadcasters

Can the Commission state if it has received complaints, and how many, from independent TV broadcasters
regarding abuse of monopoly positions by state subsidised broadcasting organisations and from which
Member States it has received such complaints? Does the Commission regard the position of independent
broadcasting Television stations throughout the Union as being satisfactory from the point of view of
competition policy?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(24 July 2001)

The Commission is able to inform the Honourable Member that it is currently dealing with a single case,
involving Austria, pursuant to Council Regulation No 17 (1) relating to the possible abuse of a dominant
position in breach of Article 82 (ex Article 86) of the EC Treaty by a TV broadcaster financed by public
funds. In the field of state aid the Commission has received complaints from Denmark, Greece, Spain,
France, Ireland, Italy, Austria, Portugal and the United Kingdom regarding state subsidised broadcasters.

The Commission notes that the situation for independent TV broadcasters varies considerably from
Member State to Member State and it will examine any case of restriction of competition brought to its
attention.

(1) OJ 13, 21.2.1962.

(2001/C 350 E/197)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1538/01

by Daniel Hannan (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(22 May 2001)

Subject: Vehicle imports (UK)

Does the Commission have any statistical research into price fixing by car manufacturers, so that vehicles
which are manufactured and purchased on the continent of Europe by car importers cannot be imported
into the United Kingdom at prices lower than those of the official franchised dealer? The case particularly
in point is the new model of the VW Passat.

Does the Commission have any information on the legal validity of a so-called (cid:145)right-hand drive surcharge(cid:146)
reportedly being levied on customers to raise prices in the UK?

Does the Commission believe that, if proven, such practices would be in breach of the Single Market?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(18 July 2001)

The Commission has no statistical data on price fixing by car manufacturers. Price fixing by car
manufacturers is the subject of a black clause under Article 6(1) of sector-specific Block Exemption
(Commission Regulation (EC) No 1475/95 of 28 June 1995 on the application of Article 85(3) of the
Treaty to certain categories of motor vehicle distribution and servicing agreements (1)) and if proven would
constitute a breach of Article 81 (ex Article 85) of the EC Treaty. The Commission does, however, publish
bi-annual surveys of prices for new cars across the Union (2). It does this to promote price transparency,
which should in turn both encourage European citizens to purchase their vehicles where prices are lowest
and enable national authorities to monitor prices.

11.12.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 350 E/183

The Commission has seen no evidence of any attempt by VW to fix prices with the intention of ensuring
that VW cars purchased on the Continent cannot be imported into the United Kingdom at prices lower
than those of the British franchised dealers. The Commission has recently imposed a € 30,96 million fine
on VW for anti-competitive price-fixing practices involving the VW Passat in Germany (3). However, the
matters investigated only directly affected the United Kingdom to the extent that prices were fixed for all
purchasers, irrespective of their Member State of residence. That case did not involve the type of practice
that the Honourable Member describes.

The Honourable Member also asks about
the legal validity of a right-hand drive surcharge. The
Commission(cid:146)s Notice of 18 January 1985 concerning Commission Regulation (EEC) No 123/85 of
12 December 1984 on the application of Article 85(3) of the Treaty to certain categories of motor vehicle
distribution and servicing agreements (4) provides that a manufacturer may charge an objectively justifiable
supplement where a car supplied to a dealer has a different specification to the corresponding model
commonly supplied within the dealer(cid:146)s contract programme. Where such a charge relates to differences
between the United Kingdom right-hand drive specification and the local specification, it is commonly
known as the right-hand drive surcharge.

The right-hand drive surcharge is generally applied to cover the greater cost of producing a right-hand
drive vehicle. Left-hand drive cars generally have lower unit production costs than equivalent right-hand
drive vehicles because they are produced in larger numbers, leading to economies of scale. It goes without
saying, however, that the additional cost should be spread over the whole right-hand drive production of
the model in question, and not just over those right-hand drive cars sold in a left-hand drive country.

The Commission notes that some car manufacturers have recently increased the amount of the right-hand
drive surcharge and is investigating the matter with a view to finding out whether the new charge is
objectively justifiable.

(1) OJ L 145, 29.6.1995.
(2) http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/car_sector/price_diffs/.
(3) See IP/01/760, 30 May 2001.
(4) OJ L 15, 18.1.1985, as replaced by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1475/95.

(2001/C 350 E/198)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1545/01

by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission

(14 May 2001)

Subject: Belgian ban on entry of pigeon transporter lorries

Is the Commission aware that the Belgian authorities have imposed a ban on pigeon transporter lorries?

Would the Commission confirm that this action is both unacceptable and inappropriate at this time, since
there are no restrictions on pigeon transportation in the UK?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(18 June 2001)

The Commission has been informed by the Belgian authorities that certain restrictions to animal
movements have been adopted in relation to the serious outbreaks of foot and mouth (FMD) disease in
certain parts of the Community.