WRITTEN QUESTION E-3513/01 by Joachim Wuermeling (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Introduction of the euro and trends in labour costs in the applicant countries.
Date: 2002-01-08
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: accession to the European Union, economic convergence, economic disparity, euro, exchange rate, gross domestic product, purchasing power, wage determination

26.9.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 229 E/29

For these reasons, the Commission does not share the assessment that the anti-dumping measures on
fertilisers would unreasonably reduce the ability of Community farmers to compete on the EU market. Nor
do these anti-dumping measures represent in any way a departure from the Community’s trade policy.

(2002/C 229 E/029)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3513/01

by Joachim Wuermeling (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(8 January 2002)

Subject: Introduction of the euro and trends in labour costs in the applicant countries

Per capita GDP in terms of purchasing power standards in the applicant countries stands at around 60 % of
the EU average in the case of the Czech Republic, for example. In contrast, the average wage calculated in
terms of currency parity stands at only around 15 % of the European figure. The reason for this disparity is
the comparatively high external value of the euro.

In the light of experience gained in the eurozone and of economic data, will this disparity be reduced by
the introduction of the euro in the applicant countries, and if so, to what extent?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(8 February 2002)

As pointed out in the question, gross domestic product (GDP) per capita in terms of Purchasing Power
Standards (PPS) is much lower in candidate countries than in most Member States. For all 13 candidate
countries it amounted in 2000 to around 35 % of the Community average, varying from nearly 83 % in
Cyprus to around 27 % in Romania. Yet, in current exchange rates (instead of PPS), the differences between
candidate countries and the Member States are even larger: in 2000, average GDP per capita in candidate
countries amounted to 16 %. The difference between these two measures stems from the difference in
domestic prices across countries. The average domestic price levels in candidate countries are considerably
lower than in the Community. Hence a certain amount of nominal income in these countries has a larger
purchasing power than in the Community. Candidate countries’ wages (without Cyprus, Malta and Turkey),
in nominal terms, amounted in 2000 to around 16 % of the Community average. Thus the domestic
purchasing power of these wages is, on average, twice as high as in the Community.

This difference in wages between existing and future Member States is expected to diminish to the extent
candidate countries manage to catch up in their economic performance and, more specifically in their
respective labour productivity. This process has already started, as the average wages of the ten Central and
Eastern European Countries (CEEC) increased from around 12 % of the Community average in 1996 to the
findings on catching-up
mentioned 16 % in 2000. However, given past experiences and analytical
processes, for some candidate countries which are presently lagging far behind the Community average,
this process might take much more than a decade.

It should be noted that accession per se does not lead to the introduction of the euro in the country
concerned. New Member States will become members with a derogation for the adoption of the euro.
Only after the fulfilment of the Treaty conditions, a new Member State can adopt the euro.

The setting of exchange rates upon entry into an exchange rate mechanism (ERM) II > a precondition for
fulfilling the convergence criteria > and, subsequently, the setting of the conversion rate to the euro, is a
multilateral process, involving all participating Member States, the Commission and the European Central
Bank (ECB). These rates should not distort economic equilibria and be close to market rates. Thus, the
introduction of the euro should not affect relative wages. This is also confirmed by past experience with
the introduction of the euro in Member States.

C 229 E/30

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

26.9.2002

The necessary achievement of macroeconomic stability and implementation of structural reforms prior to
the introduction of the euro, and the introduction of the euro itself, will enhance the efficiency and
catching-up of the economies concerned. These will, over the medium term, allow for rising real wages of
future Member States.

(2002/C 229 E/030)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3535/01

by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission

(8 January 2002)

Subject: Cluster bombs in Kosovo and elsewhere

What EU resources have been and are being devoted to the clearance of cluster bombs in Kosovo and
elsewhere in the Balkans? What is the Commission’s estimate of the scale of the remaining problem, if any?

Has the Commission made, or does it intend to make, any representations to Member States or other
bodies regarding the future manufacture and use of cluster bombs?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(18 February 2002)

Decontamination from landmines is inextricably linked to clearance of unexploded ordnance (UXO),
cluster bombs (CB) and antitank mines (ATM).

The Community has devoted some € 8,32 million between 1998 and 2000.

It is estimated that approximately 50 000 mines were laid in Kosovo and that around 30 000 cluster
bombs contaminated the area. After three years of hard work, the United Nations Mine Action Centre in
Kosovo has declared Kosovo a ‘mine safe’ area. This rapid progress can be attributed to the fact that the
mine and UXO problem in Kosovo is, relative to other parts of the world,
limited in scope and
comparatively recent; the conflict in Kosovo was relatively short; Serb maps of mined areas, and NATO
maps of air strikes, were available to deminers; and substantial assistance was provided by donors for mine
clearance work.

The Commission is aware that a marginal UXO problem still remains. Specific measures such as explosive
ordnance disposal (EOD) training > supported by the Community in 2001- are being taken in order to
address this specific need. These operations and residual mine clearance will be handled by the Kosovo
Civil Protection Corps (KCPC).

In Bosnia-Herzegovina, which is estimated to be the country most severely affected by mines/UXO in
Europe, the number of UXO/CB is considered ‘high’ but is not specified (a comprehensive Landmines
Impact Survey has not been carried out);
in Bosnia, anti-personnel mines represent much the larger
proportion of the threat. Community support to mine action from 1998 to 2001 amounted to € 8,7
million. On top of this, we are contributing some € 3,7 million to cross border de-mining between Croatia
to projects under the
and Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH), and providing very substantial support
Community Strategic Package for mine action in South East Europe, including R & D initiatives, launched
under the Stability Pact; we are contributing some € 17 million over three years to the latter.

The Commission was fully behind the EU approach to address the problems caused by cluster bombs and
other ‘explosive remnants of war’ (ERW) at the review conference of the United Nations (UN) Convention
on the prohibition or restriction on the use of certain conventional weapons (CCW). These efforts resulted
in the establishment of a Working Group of governmental experts mandated to explore the possibility to
deal with these ordnance in the framework of the CCW.