WRITTEN QUESTION P-2211/02 by Joaquim Miranda (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Growth and Stability Pact.
Date: 2002-07-12
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Portugal, budget deficit, budgetary discipline (EU), economic convergence, economic stabilisation, stability pact

14.8.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 192 E/55

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(4 September 2002)

The question asked by the Honourable Member gives rise to the following comments:

(cid:1) the Commission is aware that the Technical Chamber of Greece (TEE) refuses to register engineers
who have obtained their professional qualifications in another Member State on the basis of the
professional
recognition granted in application of Presidential Decree 165/2000, and makes
registration conditional upon academic recognition of their diplomas. This requirement does not
comply with Council Directive 89/48/EEC of 21 December 1988 on a general system for the
recognition of higher-education diplomas awarded on completion of professional education and
training of at least three years’ duration (1), and is one of the objections raised as part of the
infringement procedure initiated against Greece on account of its incorrect transposition and wrong
application of Directive 89/48/EEC;

(cid:1) for more detailed information on the infringement procedure under way, which led to Greece being
sent a reasoned opinion on 1 July 2002, the Honourable Member may wish to refer to the answer
given by the Commission to Written Question E-1691/02 by Mr Papayannakis (2).

(1) OJ L 19, 24.1.1989.
(2) OJ C 301 E, 5.12.2002, p. 210.

(2003/C 192 E/053)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2211/02

by Joaquim Miranda (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(12 July 2002)

Subject: Growth and Stability Pact

A German newspaper has revealed that the Commission apparently intends to impose stiff penalties on
Portugal for failing to remain within the 3 % budget deficit ceiling established under the Growth and
Stability Pact.

the College of Commissioners has already denied any such intention,

the
Although a member of
importance and the seriousness of the situation (cid:1) together with the lack of any recognised scientific basis
for such a ceiling (cid:1) prompt the following question: Does the Commission not think that, on account of
the obvious harmful effects of such a ceiling and the difficulties of remaining within it (particularly in the
case of the economically weakest Member States and at a time of lower-than-expected economic growth),
the requirement to remain within the ceiling should to some extent be relaxed?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(12 August 2002)

Fiscal discipline contributes to maintaining an economic environment in which monetary policy can
(as
effectively pursue price stability. The fiscal
established by the Treaty and the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP)) aims at combining budgetary discipline
with budgetary flexibility through essentially two requirements. These are firstly the requirement for the
general government deficit to remain below 3 % of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (except in exceptional
to achieve and maintain a budgetary
and temporary circumstances) and, secondly, the requirement
position ‘close to balance or in surplus’ over the cycle.

framework of Economy and Monetary Union (EMU)

Compliance with these two requirements both secures fiscal discipline and the sustainability of public
finances and allows for flexibility in the conduct of national budgetary policies by ensuring the necessary
the automatic stabilisers.
room for manoeuvre for cyclical
Furthermore, the EMU budgetary rules and procedures provide incentives, and create the scope, to refocus
the attention of budgetary policies towards medium-term concerns such as economic growth, employment
and social cohesion. Finally, the SGP enhances the predictability and transparency of fiscal policies and
facilitates the co-ordination of fiscal policies between Member States. In brief, sound public finances is in
the economic interest of all countries.

stabilisation through the working of

C 192 E/56

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

14.8.2003

As part of the framework for budgetary surveillance, Member States submit stability or convergence
programmes on an annual basis, in which they set down a medium-term target for budget positions and
an adjustment path towards. While budgetary targets in programmes are set down in nominal terms, the
Commission does take account of the impact of the economic cycle when assessing Member States’
budgetary positions. This is done by examining cyclically-adjusted budget balances.

The steps to be followed in an excessive deficit procedure are set down in the Treaty and in Council
Regulation EC/1466/97 of 7 July 1997 on the strengthening of the surveillance of budgetary positions and
the surveillance and coordination of economic policies (1). While the Excessive Deficit Procedure ultimately
does provide for the possibility to impose pecuniary sanctions, this can only occur after a long process
involving several decisions by the Council. Recourse to sanctions is only envisaged if the Member State
concerned repeatedly fails to take corrective actions to bring the deficit below 3 % of GDP within a
specified period of time. Sanctions are not applied immediately upon a country being placed in an
excessive deficit position.

(1) OJ L 209, 2.8.1997, p. 1.

(2003/C 192 E/054)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2294/02

by Patricia McKenna (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

Subject: Funding of the Via Baltica motorway in Poland

(25 July 2002)

The EU is financing the building of a motorway called the Via Baltica. This project is threatening the
Biebrza marshes in north-east Poland. This is an area of international scientific interest and includes many
habitats listed in Annex I and II to the Habitats Directive.

Is the Commission aware of the damage that the building of this motorway would cause to this sensitive
environment, and was the project environmentally assessed in accordance with the terms of the EIA
Directive?

What is the Commission’s view of this project? In the light of its policy of making the payment of
structural funds conditional on respect for the environment, is it prepared to suspend payments until the
Polish authorities alter the route chosen and comply with EU environmental laws?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(15 October 2002)

The Commission draws the attention of the Honourable Member to its responses to written questions
P-1648/02 by Mr Huhne (1), E-1694/02 by Mr Meijer (1), E-1968/02 by Mr Davies (2) and E-2284/02 by
Mr Xarchakos and Mr Dimitrakopoulos (3), confirming that neither PHARE nor ISPA funds have been
provided for the construction of the Via Baltica across the Biebrza marshes in north-east Poland.

Furthermore, such a project does not feature in neither the ISPA nor the PHARE project pipeline and,
therefore, no request for Union support for this particular project has been made by the Polish authorities.
Should the Commission receive such a request, the project will be examined in the light of the relevant
Community environmental rules. It is the position of the Commission that all candidate countries should
apply and implement the provisions of the environmental acquis,
including nature protection, already
during the pre-accession period.

(1) OJ C 301 E, 5.12.2002, p. 201.
(2) OJ C 309 E, 12.12.2002, p. 181.
(3) OJ C 161 E, 10.7.2003, p. 20.