WRITTEN QUESTION P-0975/02 by Sérgio Marques (PPE-DE) to the Commission. The Madeira International Business Centre (MIBC).
Date: 2002-04-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU regional policy, European Commission, European Union membership, Madeira, Portugal, State aid, control of State aid, free zone, operation of the Institutions, peripheral region, regional development

12.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 309 E/67

The results achieved with this agreement are in keeping with the objectives of the European Union to
restore civilian peace and the principles of democracy in the country and to find a political solution to the
crisis.

The European Union is prepared to offer political and technical support for the implementation of the
agreement and, in the perspective of new elections being called, to assist in their organisation, inter alia, by
sending international observers.

Moreover, the agreement will enable the European Union to continue implementing its assistance and
co-operation programmes.

Corruption is a problem. Also for this reason judicial reform has been identified as a crucial issue and a
justice programme will be implemented under the 9th European Development Fund (EDF) national
indicative programme (NIP).

With regard to the tax-free zone, about 110 000 people were employed in this zone in 2001. Because of
the political situation, it is foreseen that only 30 000 people will be employed in the zone at the end of
2002. Salaries in the tax-free zone are above the Malagasy average.

As for development initiatives, the 9th EDF country strategy paper and national indicative programme for
Madagascar were approved by the Commission in November 2001, but the signing has been delayed by
the political crisis. The allocation for Madagascar is EUR 327 million. Transport and rural development are
focal sectors of the future cooperation programme. Issues of strengthening of the rule of law and good
governance are also addressed, in particular the question of judicial reform.

(2002/C 309 E/078)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0975/02

by Sérgio Marques (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: The Madeira International Business Centre (MIBC)

(3 April 2002)

In July 2000, the Commission opened investigations against Portugal, on suspicion that the granting of
financial/fiscal aid to the bodies which had taken offices in the MIBC in the year 2000 was in breach of
Community law. These proceedings came as a surprise, since at the same time, the Commission’s own
services were drawing up, within the framework of the new policy of support for outermost regions, a text
amending the Commission’s New Guidelines on state aids for regional purposes, so as to ensure they took
proper account of the new legal status of the outermost regions, and make the implementation of the
policy on aid more flexible in those regions.

The Commission ignored the negative impact which the proceedings were going to have in the short term
on the whole process of promoting and developing the MIBC (cid:1) the lengthy period of inactivity imposed
by the Commission created a climate of mistrust amongst the users which led to their gradual relocation to
competing sites (cid:1) and the entire process of developing this ultra-peripheral region, a process in which the
industrial, commercial and financial activities surrounding the MIBC play no small role.

In this situation, it was imperative to bring the investigation of the aid arrangements to a swift conclusion.
However, 18 months have now passed, the maximum deadline for investigating any state aid, and no
decision whatever has yet been taken, with the only recourse left to the Portuguese authorities to end the
situation being to think about using their legal power to request the permission to return a definitive
decision on the affair, within two months of the submission of the request.

This uncertainty, in conjunction with the fact that Portugal, in the face of the threat of the Commission’s
opening a fresh investigation procedure, has decided to withdraw the notification of
the new aid
arrangements to boost the MIBC between 2001 and 2006, boils down to one irrefutable hard fact: the
MIBC is NOT WORKING!

C 309 E/68

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

12.12.2002

Given that the Commission is undoubtedly aware that this impasse is blocking one of the channels for
Madeira’s economic and social development, a process whose need for support in the shape of specific
measures, particularly in areas such as free trade zones, state aid and fiscal policy, was recently enshrined
as part of the text of the European Community Treaty, when does the Commission intend to take a
decision on this issue?

Does the Commission not think that its attitude in this specific case is diametrically opposed to its entire
policy of supporting the development of the outermost region in question?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(14 May 2002)

As the Commission has previously indicated in its answers to Written Questions P-1373/00 (1) and
P-0277/01 (2) by the Honourable Member, it has no intention whatsoever of harming the economic and
social development of Madeira and regrets that there is a climate of uncertainty surrounding the future of
the Madeira Free Zone. Nevertheless, it also points out that the application of the aid scheme for the Free
Zone was authorised only until 31 December 2000. Any arrangements concerning the future application
of the scheme must therefore be examined by the Commission, taking account of factors that include the
island’s status as an outermost region, on the basis of a prior notification by Portugal.

In the meantime, the Commission has decided to start an investigation into the application of the scheme
during 2000 and would emphasise its intention to adopt a final decision as soon as possible. Since, as it
stressed in its decision initiating the investigation, any aid granted in the Free Zone after 1 January 2000
must be considered unlawful,
it takes the view that the eighteen-month deadline referred to by the
Honourable Member is not applicable in the present case.

(1) OJ C 46 E, 13.2.2001.
(2) OJ C 235 E, 21.8.2001.

(2002/C 309 E/079)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0978/02

by Herbert Bösch (PSE) to the Commission

(12 April 2002)

Subject: Approval of state aid for cableway installations in Italy and Austria

The Commission announced in a press release of 27 February 2002 that it has approved state aid for
cableway installations in Italy and Austria. According to the Commission, aid is justified because the
installations are intended for purely local use and will not attract any users who are not resident in the
area.

1. What led the Commission to conclude that the ski lifts in Austria and Italy are intended exclusively
for local use?

Are there any studies, reports, working documents or similar information which helped the

2.
Commission to reach its decision?

Is the Commission now prepared to provide the report (or any parts of such a report presently

3.
available) requested in Written Question E-3179/01 of 7 November 2001? If not, why not?

4.

Can the Commission further provide me with all the documents used in reaching its decision?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(6 June 2002)

1.
In general, the Commission believes that not all cableway installation should be assessed in an
identical way, but that a distinction should be made between cableways destined to satisfy the generic
transport needs of the population and cableways supporting sport activities. Among the latter, a further