WRITTEN QUESTION E-1616/01 by James Provan (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Cost of refurbishment of the Berlaymont building.
Date: 2001-06-12
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Commission, administration of the Institutions, administrative expenditure (EU), seat of institution

20.12.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 364 E/159

(2001/C 364 E/174)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1608/01

by Piia-Noora Kauppi (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(1 June 2001)

Subject: Effects of Mr Berlusconi(cid:146)s election programme on the stability of the euro area

Last Sunday(cid:146)s elections in Italy seem to have resulted in a win for the centre-right Forza Italia party.
The election programme of the chairman of the party and possible future prime minister, Mr Silvio
Berlusconi, MEP, included promises of significant tax cuts and increased public investment. Unfortunately,
it was not made clear how these promises would be financed.

Does the Commission propose to take any measures if

1.
implemented in Italy at a time when the inflationary pressure on the euro area is still high?

this expansionist economic policy is

2.
Is the Commission considering initiating the same type of procedure as in the case of Ireland?
In other words will it give a warning to Italy too, if Italy(cid:146)s taxation and public spending solutions are in
conflict with the country(cid:146)s growth and stability package and have a harmful impact on the stability of the
euro area as a whole? Or are such warnings only given to the small countries in the euro area?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(25 July 2001)

The Commission actively monitors economic and budgetary developments in all Member States. Member
States(cid:146) policies are assessed on the basis of government policy objectives and of their implementation.

Based on the Italian government(cid:146)s budgetary strategy and its implementation, the Ecofin Council has
the Italian
recently formulated a set of Broad Economic Policy Guidelines, which recommend that
government achieve its fiscal policy targets. Electoral programmes do not count as government policy.

The recommendation issued by the Ecofin Council to Ireland was based on the inconsistency of the Irish
government(cid:146)s budgetary plans with the Broad Economic Policy Guidelines for 2000.

The Commission will continue to monitor budgetary developments in Italy, including for consistency with
the Broad Economic Policy Guidelines for 2001.

(2001/C 364 E/175)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1616/01

by James Provan (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Cost of refurbishment of the Berlaymont building

(12 June 2001)

Will the Commission indicate the cost of renovation of the Berlaymont, the original budgeted estimate, the
expected date of completion, and the added costs of relocation of staff from the old building and to the
renovated one?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(27 July 2001)

The latest estimate provided by S.A. Berlaymont 2000 of the cost of renovation of the Berlaymont building
as at 31 March 2001 was BEF 15,714 million (€ 390 million). However, this will probably not be the final

C 364 E/160

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.12.2001

figure since no completion date is currently available because of delays resulting from legal disputes about
the management of the site by S.A. Berlaymont 2000. The original budget estimate made in July 1997 was
BEF 13,073 million (€ 324 million).

The added cost of relocation of staff from the old building to the renovated building is not easy to quantify
with precision because many moves from, or into, a building necessitate a number of complementary
moves in or to other buildings. In 1991, when the Commission left the Berlaymont, about 3 000 people
moved to substitution buildings, triggering roughly 6 000 complementary moves. It is likely that the
reoccupation of the building would necessitate a similar number of moves. In 2001 the average per
capita cost of a move, including furniture and informatics, ranges between € 100 and € 300 per person
depending on the technical conditions and complexity of the works to be carried out. These relocation
expenses constitute part of the global building and informatics expenditure foreseen in the Commission
budget under Titles A-1 and A-5.

In this context, it is important to note that when the Commission vacated the Berlaymont in 1991, it was
agreed that it would continue to pay rent for the building and that the Belgian state would in return cover
the much higher rental cost of those buildings which the Commission has been obliged to use as
temporary substitutes for the Berlaymont. In 2001, the Commission pays a rent of € 14 140 135 for the
Berlaymont whilst the Belgian State pays € 32 382,92 for the substitution buildings. This arrangement will
continue until reoccupation of the Berlaymont is satisfactorily completed.

For further information, the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answers to Written
Questions E-936/01 by Mr Sj(cid:246)stedt (1) and E-1575/01 by Mrs van der Laan (2).

(1) OJ C 318 E, 13.11.2001, p. 155.
(2) See p. 152.

(2001/C 364 E/176)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1617/01

by Jorge HernÆndez Mollar (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(12 June 2001)

Subject: Aid for construction of plants for the separation and treatment of light packaging

The Association of Local Authorities of the Western Costa del Sol, in Malaga province (Spain), has entered
into an agreement with an enterprise in the sector for the selective collection of light packaging (plastics,
cartons, cans) and for the construction and operation of a plant for the separation of such packaging in the
association(cid:146)s member municipalities.

The aim is to meet the deadlines laid down by the EU directives for introducing selective waste collection.

Can the Commission state on what basis bodies such as this association can benefit from Council aid for
the construction, maintenance and operation of plants of this nature?

Answer given by Mrs Wallstr(cid:246)m on behalf of the Commission

(25 July 2001)

The Commission can inform the Honourable Member that Member States have a certain amount of
discretion in implementing their obligation under Council Directive 94/62/EC of 20 December 1994, on
packaging and packaging waste (1). In particular this applies in respect of the Member States(cid:146) obligation to
meet the recovery targets in Article 6 and the establishment of return, collection and recovery systems
under Article 7 of the Directive.