WRITTEN QUESTION E-2881/02 by Theresa Villiers (PPE-DE)and Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Selling of Irish newspapers.
Date: 2002-10-14
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Ireland, exclusive distribution agreement, free movement of goods, freight rate, newspaper, restriction on competition, selective distribution agreement

10.7.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 161 E/49

(2003/C 161 E/052)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2881/02

by Theresa Villiers (PPE-DE)
and Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(14 October 2002)

Subject: Selling of Irish newspapers

1.
Is the Commission aware that in the Republic of Ireland, newsagents have to pay carriage charges to
receive and sell all United Kingdom national newspapers but that no such charges are payable on leading
Irish titles including the Irish Independent, the Irish Times, and the Irish Examiner (though in the case of
the latter only in the province of Munster)?

2.

Is the Commission aware that these carriage charges have been rising well ahead of the RPI?

Is the Commission also aware that

3.
in north Donegal, United Kingdom and Northern Irish
newsagents, Menzies and WNS, control newspaper distribution with territorial exclusive arrangements
which allow them to impose carriage charges and to invoice in the pound sterling rather than euros?

4.
Is the Commission further aware that to obtain distribution of their titles in the United Kingdom, the
Irish newspaper publishers sign exclusive distribution arrangements which mean that to obtain supply,
British and Northern Irish newsagents have no choice of supplier and have to pay carriage charges, often
involving the unnecessary duplication of delivery, which have also risen well ahead of the RPI?

the above, will

In the light of

5.
the Commission investigate whether the system of exclusive
geographical territories and carriage charges constitute illegal and unacceptable restrictions on the trade in
English language newspapers between the different parts of the United Kingdom and the Republic of
Ireland?

Do these practices restrict the creation of a single market and pan European Union products, thus

6.
reducing cultural exchange?

Do they reduce the availability of the press particularly in rural and social excluded urban areas, thus

7.
reducing social welfare?

Do they also constitute an illegal transfer of wealth from small independent business people to large

8.
commercial organisations, the agreements between which constitute cartels?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(27 November 2002)

The Commission is aware of the practice of carriage charges in distribution systems for newspapers in the
including the United Kingdom (1), but it has no specific information on the current
Member States,
functioning and effects of this system in Ireland.

Exclusive distribution systems as referred to by the Honourable Members, if based on agreements between
publishers, wholesalers and newsagents, may be relevant under the Community competition rules, as laid
down in Article 81 of the EC Treaty. In this context, the Block Exemption Regulation (EC) No 2790/
1999 (2) in conjunction with the Guidelines on vertical restraints (3) is particularly relevant. In that regard,
it is also useful to recall that the European Court of Justice in its BINON judgement of 1985 (4) explicitly
recognised the efficiencies brought about by contractual newspaper distribution systems (cid:1) in the case at
issue a selective distribution system (cid:1) while subjecting their admissibility pursuant to Article 81 of the EC
Treaty to certain conditions, such as the need for non-discriminatory selection of the distributors on the
basis of objective and qualitative criteria.

The situations described by the Honourable Members have not been the subject of a notification or a
complaint to the Commission with regard to Community competition rules. Nor has the Commission
currently any evidence that the differences in the wholesale price for Irish and British newspapers in
Ireland or the obligations under exclusive distribution arrangements entered into by Irish newspaper
publishers in the United Kingdom are the consequence of behaviour contrary to Community competition
rules. It should also be noted that carriage charges specifically foreseen for printed products imported from

C 161 E/50

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

10.7.2003

transport and
the United Kingdom into Ireland or vice-versa may be designed to cover additional
distribution costs incurred by the wholesaler. The British office of fair trading is currently reviewing
whether the carriage charges actually reflect the commercial and economic distribution costs of newspaper
wholesalers.

The Commission is following closely the evolution of cross-border pricing for newspapers and magazines
within the Union in the light of Community competition rules, has established contact with the Irish and
British competition authorities with a view to further assessing the matter.

(1) See review by the OFT, http://www.oft.gov.uk/news/press+releases/2002/pn+02-02.htm.
(2) Commission Regulation (EC) No 2790/1999 of 22 December 1999 on the application of Article 81(3) of the Treaty

to categories of vertical agreements and concerted practices, OJ L 336 of 29.12.1999.

(3) Commission Notice (cid:1) Guidelines on vertical restraints, OJ C 291 of 13.10.2000.
(4) ECJ, judgment of 3 July 1985, Case 243/83 SA Binon & Cie v. SA Agence et messageries de la presse [1985] ECR

2015.

(2003/C 161 E/053)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2894/02

by Jens-Peter Bonde (EDD) to the Commission

(14 October 2002)

Subject: Bookkeeping in the Commission

1. Which DGs have signed their accounts without reservation, and which DGs have made reservations
to the accounts?

2. Which DGs have double entry bookkeeping for all their transactions?

3. Which DGs use Excel spreadsheets for their bookkeeping?

By what date does the Commission expect double entry bookkeeping to be established in the various

4.
directorates and agencies?

5. When will there be a centrally kept bookkeeping system that includes the transactions from every
DG and the decentralised agencies and bodies?

Answer given by Mr Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(2 December 2002)

(DG)

Each Directorate General

the available resources and the regularity and legality of

in the annual activity report makes a declaration on the sound
1.
financial management of
the underlying
transactions, not simply on the accounts. The DG for the Budget expressed two reserves in his 2001
declaration, one on the synchronisation, consistency and security of data for the financial information and
one on the imperfect reflection of the complete situation of the assets and liabilities in the financial
position. Both matters were already cited in the 2001 Working Paper as matters needing improvements.
Modernisation measures have been taken since then, such as introducing new elements in the financial
statements (registration and depreciation of fixed assets, value adjustments for entitlements, pension rights,
entry of carryovers as charges and debts for the financial year), improvements in accounting information
system (synchronisation and quality assurance, system interface, security access update and review, system
failure tests, invoice register, etc.).

All transactions registered by DGs in their budgetary management tool are booked in the central

2.
accounting system (SAP R/3) on a double entry book keeping basis:

(cid:1) Si2 is the budgetary management tool for the authorising services (DGs). Transactions are introduced
by the Directorates General
in Si2, either directly, or indirectly via transfer from local computer
systems, through a standard interface. All transactions must be validated in Si2 by the authorising
officer before transfer into R/3;