WRITTEN QUESTION E-0580/02 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Assessment of the stability programme for Greece.
Date: 2002-03-05
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Greece, administrative transparency, gross domestic product, public debt, stability programme

6.2.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 28 E/35

Stray dogs are being treated in a barbaric way in Bucharest, in that they are rounded up and transported
(cid:1) if they survive the journey (cid:1) to large-scale municipal kennels, where they are brutally killed by an
injection of magnesium sulphate.

The method adopted by the Basescu city council to eliminate the stray dogs living in the city by catching
them and killing them, after abandoning the previous policy of sterilisation, is ineffective, since it does not
tackle the root causes of the problem. Mass sterilisation could remedy or at least contain the problem.

The Basescu administration is not infringing any Romanian law, but has adopted an ethically unacceptable
approach, since Romania,
in the context of its accession to the EC, should comply with Community
legislation on the protection of animals.

Does the European Community not intend to ascertain whether the behaviour of the Bucharest city
council and Romanian law are in line with the ‘acquis communautaire’, to which Romania will soon have
to adhere as a candidate for accession to the European Union?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(3 April 2002)

The European Union has opted for high standards of animal protection. A protocol on the protection of
animals is annexed to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and Community legislation is in
force on the protection of wild animals, protection of animals used for experimental or scientific purposes,
animal welfare on the farm, during transport and at slaughter.

To the extent that Community law applies, Romania must naturally comply with her obligation to take on
the Community acquis in the course of her preparations for accession. However, many other questions,
such as the control of stray animals, fall within the exclusive competence of the Member States and
therefore the Commission is not in the position to address this issue with the Romanian authorities.

(2003/C 28 E/040)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0580/02

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(5 March 2002)

Subject: Assessment of the stability programme for Greece

The Commission’s assessment (30 January 2002) of the updated stability programme for Greece for the
period 2001-2004 reports that ‘The projected decline in the government debt ratio is slower compared
with the projections included in the 2000 stability programme: the debt ratio is set to decline from 99,6 %
of GDP in 2001 to 90 % of GDP instead of 84 % of GDP in 2004. Developments in the government debt
are persistently affected by financial operations; as these are partly not recorded in the budget, lack of
transparency raises doubt about the quality of the budgetary adjustment.’ The Ecofin Council, in approving
the updated stability programme, amended the Commission’s decision and invited the authorities ‘to
provide more detailed information on financial operations in future programme updates in order to allow
a better understanding of debt developments.’ What are the operations which, according to the
Commission’s communication, are not recorded in the budget? Is there government expenditure which is
recorded outside the general budget? What factors create lack of transparency and doubt about the quality
of budgetary policy?

C 28 E/36

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

6.2.2003

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(22 April 2002)

The debt to the gross domestic product (GDP) ratio in Greece is among the highest in the Community and
far above the threshold of 60 % of GDP set in the EC Treaty. A rapid reduction in the debt ratio is essential
in particular in order to ensure the long-term sustainability of public finance. Greece has made significant
progress in recent years in correcting fiscal imbalances but the reduction in the debt ratio has been much
smaller than the rapid increase in nominal GDP, the achievement of high and increasing primary surpluses
and the reduction in interest rates would have implied. To some extent this was explained by exchange
rate movements before the entry of Greece in the euro zone, given that a large part of the government
debt was denominated in foreign currencies. However, according to the 2001 update of the stability
programme, unspecified factors hold back the decline in the debt ratio to the tune of 4 % of GDP for the
period 2002-2004 despite the projected use of privatisation receipts (averaging above 1 % of GDP) to pay-
off public debt.

The 2001 update of the stability programme compares the outcome of the stock of debt at the end of
2001 with the projections included in the budget for 2001. The total increase in the stock of debt is
estimated at EUR 6,55 billion while the budget projected an increase of EUR 4,78 billion. Factors other
than the deficit and the burden from foreign exchange amount to EUR 6,35 billion instead of EUR 3,20
billion as calculated in the budget. Of these, only a small part was due to higher military borrowing while
no information is provided for the other factors that caused the faster than projected increase in the stock
of debt. In addition, DEKA (a state-owned holding company which is not part of the general government)
paid off public debt for an amount equal to EUR 4,46 billion instead of EUR 2,20 billion projected in the
budget for 2001.

Against this background, the Commission considers that the multiplication in recent years of operations
which do not appear in the deficit but influence debt developments and the fact that the 2001 updated
stability programme projects the continuation of such operations in the medium-term, providing no clear
information on their purpose, represents a lack of transparency which raises difficulties in assessing the
quality of the budgetary adjustment proposed in the stability programme.

(2003/C 28 E/041)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0590/02

by Paolo Bartolozzi (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(25 February 2002)

Subject: Europeanisation of Italian law 107/90 on the production of blood derivatives

Italian law 107/90 requires the processing of plasma to be located ‘entirely’ on Italian territory (currently
about 500 000 litres a year). This law in fact safeguards a monopoly as only one company, Kedrion SpA, a
member of the Marcucci Group, qualifies. This violation of the competition rules was condemned by the
Competition and Market Authority on 26 January 1996. During the past parliamentary term efforts were
made, without success, to enact an amendment to Law 107 which would have seemingly removed the
monopoly. The proposal would have opened up access to the processing of Italian plasma by allowing
industrial companies to carry out at least the first stage of the processing cycle (plasma fractioning) in Italy
and then to complete the processing and packaging in Europe.

This proposal, which is still supported by a number of members of Parliament, would make it possible to
move from a monopoly situation to a duopoly, excluding by law other European competitors with plasma
fractioning and production plants in Member States of the EU.

The opening up of the production of blood derivatives from Italian plasma to the whole of Europe would
allow all Italian companies to operate not only in Italy but also in Spain, Germany and the UK and would
enable all European firms to compete in Italy in terms of output, technology and products.