WRITTEN QUESTION E-3366/01 by Armando Cossutta (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Public contracts in Italy and the Mafia.
Date: 2001-12-06
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Italy, Mafia, award of contract, fight against crime, fraud, public contract

29.8.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 205 E/29

In the case of Nigeria, it may be noted that the European Union is conducting a dialogue with the Nigerian
authorities, on the basis of its Common Position on Nigeria (1), with a view to reinforcing Nigeria’s
ongoing process to consolidate democracy and respect for human rights. In this context, the Council
welcomes the Federal Government’s efforts to ensure that Nigerian law is consistent with international
human rights instruments. It regards the peaceful action taken in that connection by Moslem and Christian
human rights groups in Nigeria as encouraging. The Union has been following the case of Safiya Hussaini
closely, and notes that it is currently subject to appeal before the Sokoto Sharia Court of Appeal.

Accordingly, the Member States of the European Union and the Commission have given firm and
coordinated backing to the international efforts in support of Ms Hussaini. A formal European Union
demarche is being considered, if the Sokoto Sharia court of appeal upholds the sentence.

(1) Common Position 2001/373/CFSP, OJ L 132, 15.5.2001.

(2002/C 205 E/030)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3366/01

by Armando Cossutta (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(6 December 2001)

Subject: Public contracts in Italy and the Mafia

In its reply to question E-2663/01 (1) concerning the serious statement made by the Italian Minister for
Public Works, Mr Lunardi, to the effect that, where public contracts are concerned, one has to ‘live with
the Mafia’, the Commission does not address the issue which has recently emerged.

How can the Commission state that

1.
‘the Italian Government has always demonstrated total
commitment to the objectives’ of combating fraud if all the Commission has so far put forward is a
proposal (Article 43(1)) and the Italian Government has expressly stated that one has to ‘live with the
Mafia’? Or does it consider the Italian Minister’s statement need not be taken seriously < and, if so, on the
basis of what information?

In such circumstances, how can the Commission ensure that effective checks are carried out when

2.
contracts are awarded?

3.
If the current government takes the view that one has to ‘live with the Mafia’, how, and using what
tools, can the Commission convince European companies that Italy offers equal opportunities for winning
contracts?

(1) OJ C 115 E, 16.5.2002, p. 142.

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(21 January 2002)

1.
In its answer to written question E-2663/01 by the Honourable Member (1), the Commission pointed
out that, in Article 46(1) of its proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council
relating to the coordination of procedures for the award of public supply, public service and public works
contracts, it introduced an obligation aimed at excluding from participation in the invitation to tender any
tenderer who has been the subject of a definitive judgement for participation in a criminal organisation,
for corruption or for financial fraud against the European Communities.

The Commission also noted, in this context, that the Italian Government has always demonstrated its full
commitment to achieving the objectives of this proposal. In this respect, the Commission reiterates that
the Italian Government has up to now agreed with and supported the proposals which the Commission
has made concerning the above-mentioned aspect, during the discussions on the aforementioned proposal
for a Directive.

C 205 E/30

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

29.8.2002

The Commission also wishes to point out that the procedures laid down by the Community
2.
Directives currently in force, and the transparency which these bring, are also intended to combat
corruption and fraud in public contracts. The monitoring of compliance with these procedures, particularly
by the Commission but also by the national courts, plays a part in the battle against these practices.

The Commission is convinced that its new measure, once approved and in force, will help tighten up the
checks on procedures for awarding public contracts, by making it compulsory for awarding authorities to
exclude tenderers guilty of the aforementioned offences, rather than simply giving them this option, as at
present.

3.
Should the Honourable Member have any knowledge of award procedures for public contracts
during which the Italian authorities may have favoured entrepreneurs linked to a criminal organisation,
and this despite healthy competition at Community level, he is free to inform the Commission of this. If he
did so, the Commission would examine the information received and request, if needs be, any necessary
clarification from the Italian authorities, in order to check whether there would be any reason to initiate
infringement proceedings under Article 226 (ex Article 169) of the EC Treaty.

(1) OJ C 115 E, 16.5.2002, p. 142.

(2002/C 205 E/031)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3372/01

by Inger Schörling (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(7 December 2001)

Subject: Livestock premiums

livestock farmers have applied for and been granted EU
In Sweden, and probably in other countries,
livestock premiums, but then failed to treat their animals in accordance with the laws and regulations in
force. Premiums have even been granted to persons who had been banned from keeping animals because
of their past neglect.

The EU livestock premiums are paid even if the animals are neglected, and regardless whether their owner
is authorised to keep livestock. The premiums are paid so long as the owner has the animals in his
possession.

Is the Council aware of this problem and, if so, how does it intend to deal with it?

Has the Council sought to ascertain the percentage of the livestock premiums paid each year in the EU
which goes to persons who neglect their livestock?

Reply

(13 May 2002)

The various schemes under which Community aid is payable to livestock farmers are governed by

1.
three Council Regulations, namely:

< Regulation (EC) No 1254/1999 on the common organisation of the market in beef and veal (1);

< Regulation (EC) No 2467/1998 on the common organisation of the market in sheepmeat and
goatmeat (2). However, with effect from 1 January 2002, this Regulation was superseded by Regulation
(EC) No 2529/2001 of 19 December 2001 (3);

< Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 of 17 May 1999 on support for rural development from the European
and amending and repealing certain

and Guarantee

Fund (EAGGF)

Agricultural Guidance
Regulations (4).