WRITTEN QUESTION E-2097/01 by Pat Gallagher (UEN) to the Commission. ESF support for training in Connaught, Ulster.
Date: 2001-07-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU regional policy, European Social Fund, Ireland, regional aid

C 364 E/244

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.12.2001

As regards night work performed by adolescents, the Directive stipulates that Member States shall adopt
measures necessary to prohibit work either between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. or between 11 p.m. and 7 a.m.
Member States may, by legislative or regulatory provision, authorise work by adolescents in specific areas
of activity during the period in which night work is prohibited but also in such cases, work between
midnight and 4 a.m. must be prohibited. The possibility, set out in the Directive, to depart from this
general prohibition in certain sectors, does not cover the bakeries sector.

The Commission feels that this provision allows Member States to find a balance between the vocational
training requirements of adolescents and the need to protect young people against work liable to be
detrimental to their safety, health or physical development. At the moment the Commission is not
planning to propose any amendments to the Directive.

(1) OJ L 216, 20.8.1994.

(2001/C 364 E/269)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2097/01

by Pat Gallagher (UEN) to the Commission

(13 July 2001)

Subject: ESF support for training in Connaught, Ulster

Will the Commission provide details of the level of EU support through the European Social Fund to
Connaught, Ulster from the period June 1994 to date?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(5 September 2001)

The Commission manages the European Social Fund (ESF) at a programme rather than project level and
does not hold records of ESF spending on a sub-regional level.

However, the Managing Authority for the ESF in Ireland, the Department of Enterprise, Trade and
Employment has provided the following details of ESF spending from January 1994 until December 1999
under the Human Resources Development Operational Programme (HRD OP) and for 2000 under the
Ireland Objective 1 and Objective 1 in Transition Employment and Human Resources Development
Operational Programme (EMPHRD OP).

Records of drawdowns from the European Structural Funds under the 1994-1999 round were not broken
down by province and specific figures for the Connaught and Ulster areas are therefore not available.

From an examination of regional forecasts and available data on expenditure it can, however, be estimated
that the total drawdown for the Border and Western regions, under the HRD OP, was approximately:

(cid:129) IEP 108 070 000 for the Western region, and

(cid:129) IEP 162 250 000 for the Border region.

During the 1994-1999 programming period, in addition to the HRD OP, a total amount of € 395 755 471
in ESF assistance was allocated to Ireland through five sectoral programmes, the Tourism OP, the OP for
Industrial Development, the Fisheries OP, the Local Urban and Rural Development OP and the OP for
Agriculture, Rural Development and Forestry.

For the 2000-2006 funding period Ireland has regionalised into 2 NUTS II regions, the Border, Midland
and Western region (BMW) and the Southern and Eastern region (SAE). All funding allocations for the new
round were made on a regional basis.

20.12.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 364 E/245

While the BMW region does not equate exactly with the Connaught and Ulster area because of the
inclusion of Counties Longford, Louth, Westmeath, Offaly and Laois, figures for this region are the most
accurate available at
for 2000 of
IEP 23 110 000 in the BMW region.

this time and indicate a drawdown, under

the EMPHRD OP,

For the 2000-2006 programming round, additional assistance is allocated to the BMW region through the
Border, Midland and Western Region Objective 1 OP. The allocation to this region for 2000 amounts to
€ 1 880 000.

(2001/C 364 E/270)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2109/01

by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(10 July 2001)

Subject: Price differences in the EU

At the end of May the Commission presented the initial results of its survey into price differences on the
European market with regard to two sectors: electronic goods and fresh products. The survey shows that
prices for certain electronic goods may diverge by up to 40 % from one Member State to another, while
prices for fresh products may vary by a factor of three. Significantly, the Commission notes that European
consumers could make savings averaging around 12 % if they purchased each product at its lowest sale
price in the EU.

Such a situation cannot be seen as constituting a genuine single market. Can the Commission specify the
reasons for these price differences among the EU Member States and indicate what steps it will take to
favour greater price convergence in the sectors concerned?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(4 September 2001)

Price convergence should take place in a competitive and efficient economic environment where
competition drives prices to converge at the lower levels of the price range. This is essential to realising
the full potential of the Internal Market to the benefit of consumers.

The Commission considers that prices are the best indicators of market performance, especially from the
point of view of consumers and consequently, the monitoring of price differences within the Internal
Market is being improved. Issue n. 8 of the Internal Market Scoreboard released the first results of this
improved monitoring. Further results will be published in the Commission(cid:146)s Cardiff report on the
functioning of product and capital markets before the end of this year. Results to this date confirm the
persistence of significantly high price dispersion in the fresh fruit and consumer electronics sectors.

Detailed information on price differences at the market level is indispensable to identify the origin of those
differences. Even in a perfectly integrated market, factors such as differences in consumers tastes or
preferences, transport costs and the tradability of some goods can result in price differences. These latter
factors explain part of the high price differences that are observed in some fresh food goods.

At this stage of its monitoring process, the Commission cannot draw definitive conclusions, but there is
evidence pointing to the existence of other causes of a structural nature which, while being compatible
with the EC Treaty, are not compatible with a well-functioning Internal Market. This evidence suggests that
factors such as differences in distribution systems and regulatory differences could explain a significant part
of remaining price differences. In those cases, structural reforms would be needed in order to improve
market performance. Most of those structural reforms have to be implemented at the national level. The
recommendations issued in the Broad Economic Policy Guidelines will contribute to that end.