WRITTEN QUESTION P-0922/02 by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Temporary protection scheme for the shipbuilding industry.
Date: 2002-03-26
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU aid, South Korea, World Trade Organisation, international commercial arbitration, restriction on competition, shipbuilding

C 28 E/58

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

6.2.2003

(cid:1) an open tender procedure is being launched for a EUR 1 000 000 framework contract for the SIA of

Economic Partnership Agreement negotiations with ACP states (maximum length five years);

(cid:1) an open tender procedure is being launched for a EUR 500 000 framework contract for an SIA of the

ongoing negotiations with the Gulf states (maximum length two years).

As regards the specific question of the SIA of agreements currently under negotiation, in particular with
Chile, the Honourable Member is asked to note the following:

(cid:1) the current negotiations between the EU and Chile are making good progress and the General Affairs
Council stated on 28 January that they should continue with a view to conclusion by the Madrid
Summit in May;

(cid:1) A EUR 250 000 framework contract was signed with Planistat on 4 March for an SIA of the EU-
Mercosur and EU-Chile negotiations. In view of the progress of the negotiations with Chile, the
consultants will initially focus on the SIA of the EU-Chile talks.

The Commission has asked the consultants to submit the final results of the study by the end of July
so that, if the results of the negotiations were to be put to the Council and Parliament around that
time, they could include the SIA.

(cid:1) One of the underlying principles of the SIA process is its transparency: all the results of the studies
conducted by the consultants are available on the Commission’s website at: http://europa.eu.int/trade
(currently being updated) and on the consultants’ sites (Institute for Development Policy and
Management, University of Manchester, http://idpm.man.ac.uk/iasdu/index.html; Stockholm Environ-
ment Institute http://www.sei.se; the Mercosur study site will be set up in April/May). The Commission
will certainly inform the Parliament and Council of the results of the study. Meetings are also to be
organised shortly with civil society representatives. An initial meeting is planned for the week of 13 to
17 May.

(2003/C 28 E/063)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0922/02

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(26 March 2002)

Subject: Temporary protection scheme for the shipbuilding industry

In the conclusions of the 4-5 December 2001 Council meeting of Energy and Industry Ministers it is stated
that the Council held an extensive discussion on the proposal for a regulation under which a temporary
protection scheme for the Community shipbuilding industry is to be set up. However, since it failed to
secure a qualified majority on the Commission proposal, the Council agreed to return to the matter at a
subsequent meeting.

Would the Commission therefore provide the following information:

(cid:1) Is any revision of the Commission’s original proposal being drawn up?

(cid:1) If so, will the time limit for the provision of aid be extended until the end of 2003? And when will the

revised version be considered by the Council?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(25 April 2002)

The Industry Council of 5 December 2001 did not take a decision on the Commission’s proposal for a
the
temporary defensive mechanism for
Community’s possible action against Korea in the World Trade Organisation (WTO).

intended to support

(TDM), which was

shipbuilding (1)

6.2.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 28 E/59

The TDM was limited in time and scope. The segments eligible for aid under the Proposal were those
identified by the Commission’s investigation under Council Regulation (EC) No 3286/94 of 22 December
1994 laying down Community procedures in the field of the common commercial policy in order to
in particular those
ensure the exercise of
established under the auspices of the WTO (2) hereafter Trade Barriers Regulation (TBR)
into Korean
shipbuilding practices, as suffering considerable injury and serious prejudice, caused by unfair Korean
practices. The aid under the TDM would, accordingly, have been limited to container ships and product
and chemical tankers.

the Community’s rights under international

trade rules,

The Commission was requested in November 2001 by the Community shipbuilding industry to update the
injury part of the investigations under the TBR. Once these investigations will have been finalised, the
results will be presented to the Council
(the TBR Committee). As to the current state of play, the
Commission can confirm that a revision of the Proposal would only be drawn up if this were warranted by
the findings of the updated TBR report.

(1) OJ C 304 E, 30.10.2001.
(2) OJ L 349, 31.12.1994.

(2003/C 28 E/064)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0929/02

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(5 April 2002)

Subject: Investigation into a cartel of plasterboard manufacturers

Almost one year ago, it was announced that Commissioner Monti had begun an investigation into the
possibility that price agreements had been concluded between European plasterboard manufacturers. These
manufacturers were said to include Etex (Belgium), British Plasterboard (United Kingdom), Knauf
(Germany) and Lafarge (France). In mid-April 2001, the Commission informed the undertakings concerned
that an inquiry into their operations had begun.

Can the Commission indicate the results of its investigation? Has any conclusive evidence of the conclusion
of any price agreements actually been found? What penalty will the Commission impose if that is the case?

If the Commission is not able to indicate any results, why can it not do so? What stage has been reached
in the investigation, and when may we expect concrete results? What other aspects of the investigation has
the Commission still to carry out?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(21 May 2002)

As stated by the Honourable Member, the Commission, following press reports and subsequent press
inquiries, confirmed on 23 April 2001 (MEMO/01/149), that since the autumn of 1998 it had been
investigating the existence of a suspected price-fixing cartel
in the market for plasterboard (a plaster
product used in the construction industry). In April 2001 the Commission sent a statement of objections
to five companies. This followed a thorough investigation, which included inspections in the course of
1998 and 1999 at the premises of several plasterboard producers. The Commission indicated that it would
not at that stage reveal either the identity of the companies concerned or the details of the objections
raised against them.

The Commission’s investigation in the case is on-going. There is no fixed deadline for the conclusion of its
antitrust investigations, the duration of which is determined largely by the complexity of the case in
question, the exercise by the undertakings concerned of their rights of defence and by the internal
procedures of the Commission.

The Commission is, however, able to inform the Honourable Member that the parties involved have
already had access to the Commission’s file and have made use of their right to reply to the Commission’s
objections, including being heard orally at a formal hearing. The Commission expects to be in a position in
the near future to decide what further steps (if any) should be taken in the proceedings.