WRITTEN QUESTION E-2110/02 by Ioannis Marínos (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Absence of statistics for Greece.
Date: 2002-07-17
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU publication, EU statistics, Eurostat, Greece, Luxembourg, data processing, data transmission, export (EU), intra-EU trade

14.8.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 192 E/51

Under a multiple framework contract the authorising department may call the second contractor on the
list, rather than the contractor heading the list, and then, if necessary the third, and so on, if the preceding
contractors are unable to fulfil the order for reasons that do not entail termination of the contract.

In some exceptional cases, in particular for certain services falling under annex 1B of Directive 92/50/EC
on the coordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts, the Commission may find it
possible to accept multiple framework contracts according to the provisions of which the ranking of the
contractors can be readjusted. This is only accepted on a case by case basis, after a thorough analysis of all
the documents submitted and subject to prior announcement of the intention to operate such a system in
justification has to provided by the authorising
the documentation of the invitation to tender. Full
department.

(2003/C 192 E/049)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2110/02

by Ioannis Marínos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(17 July 2002)

Subject: Absence of statistics for Greece

Euro-Indicators No 48/2002, published by Eurostat, lists internal trade and total exports for the Member
States of the Union. The figures produced are complete and highly informative and cover the period up to
January 2002 even in respect of countries which are not members of the Union, such as Russia, Poland,
Turkey and others. Surprisingly, however, there are no statistics for Greece or Luxembourg (EU Member
States) for 2002 in respect of their total imports and exports and their balance of trade.

What are the reasons for this absence of statistics? With particular reference to Greece, is the Commission
satisfied with the flow and quality of statistics from the Greek authorities? Has it encountered problems
with delays in the notification of statistics to its departments and Eurostat and with which particular data?
Are there more general problems associated with the reliability of the data and, if so, what are they?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(17 September 2002)

1. With regard to Luxembourg, the absence of data for January 2002 in Euro-Indicators No 48/2002
was caused by a delay in the transmission of the data to Eurostat, resulting from a change in the data
processing application at the beginning of 2002. This problem has since been resolved and the data
transmission deadlines are now being respected.

In the case of Greece, a delay in the transmission of data to Eurostat also explains the absence of data for
January 2002. There are two main reasons for the frequent delays:
the significant proportion of
declarations transmitted on paper, and the lack of suitable resources to process these declarations.

The Commission (Eurostat) is not happy with the transmission of data by Greece, as it is failing to
2.
meet the regulatory deadlines. Eurostat has drawn the attention of the Greek authorities to this matter on a
number of occasions.

Eurostat considers the quality of the Greek data to be comparable to that of most other Member States.

3.
The Commission (Eurostat) has identified delays in the transmission of both intra-Community and
extra-Community statistics by Greece. With regard to the latter, it should be emphasised that the statistical
declarations are collected and processed by the customs authority (Ministry of Finance), and then validated
and transmitted to Eurostat by the Greek Statistical Office.

C 192 E/52

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

14.8.2003

Eurostat is aware of this arrangement and is paying close attention to the efforts being made by Greece to
deal with the situation regarding transmission deadlines.

Depending on the results for the coming months, Eurostat will, if necessary, step up its representations to
the Greek authorities.

The Commission (Eurostat) has no specific comments to make regarding the reliability of the Greek

4.
data.

(2003/C 192 E/050)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2160/02

by Theresa Villiers (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(18 July 2002)

Subject: The euro and the rounding-up of prices

Extracts from the Eurobarometer poll 57.1, published in Memo IP/02/791 dated 31 May 2002, suggest
that 68,5 % of those surveyed in the eurozone believe that prices have been rounded up in all areas.

Has the Commission attempted to quantify the impact on prices as a result of rounding-up following the
introduction of the euro?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(16 September 2002)

There is no statistical evidence that the euro changeover has caused a generalised price increase in any of
the euro area countries.

Eurostat issued a press release in July 2002 that analyses trends in prices over the last few months and
addresses the euro changeover related issues (1).

Inflation in the euro area peaked in May 2001 (3,3 % annual
increase of the harmonised indices of
consumer prices (HICP)) and has not since reached comparable levels. During the changeover period it is
possible to observe an increase from an annual growth rate of 2 % in December 2001 to an annual rate of
2,7 % in January 2002. These increases can be traced to the hike in oil prices and prices of fresh fruit and
vegetables. In fact, inflation has followed a similar trend (from 1,9 % to 2,5 % annually) in the Union,
thereby including the three countries not part of the euro area. In particular, from December 2001 to
January 2002, yearly inflation increased from 2,1 % to 2,5 % in Denmark and from 1 % to 1,6 % in the
United Kingdom. During this period, inflation decreased in Portugal and in the Netherlands. Italy saw only
a minor increase in inflation from 2,2 % to 2,4 % (2). Inflation has since then been characterised by a
descending trend. It reached 1,8 % in the euro area in June 2002.

The average rate of change in the euro-zone HICP between the first six months of 2002 and the last six
months of 2001 was 1,4 %. This rate was the same as the six-month rate ending in June 2001 and close to
the corresponding rates in June and December 2000.

The largest part of the price increases over this period can for most item groups (cid:1) according to Eurostat’s
analysis (cid:1) be explained by a normal inflation pattern and by some special non-euro factors; in particular
bad weather affecting fruit and vegetable prices, car and energy prices, and some significant tax increases
on tobacco (3). These factors can explain as much as 1,2 percentage points out of the total of 1,4 %. The
contribution to the 1,4 % total of the changeover to euro banknotes and coins most likely falls within the
range of 0,0 % to 0,2 % (4).

Some sectors of the economy have, nonetheless, seen a more pronounced increase in prices. Apart from
food, some services, mainly hotels and restaurants, some health-related services and some repair services
registered strong price increases. It is possible that due to the particularly sensitive nature of categories