WRITTEN QUESTION E-3083/02 by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Failure in Sweden of EIB preferential loans for small businesses.
Date: 2002-10-28
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EIB loan, EU industrial policy, Sweden, administrative formalities, aid to undertakings, corporate finance, small and medium-sized enterprises

10.7.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 161 E/63

As mentioned at point 4, Member States cannot protect companies from their possible exclusion
5.
from an European-wide tendering procedure by an out-of-court settlement, as the European Directives
relating to public procurement, which apply in all Member States, foresee the possible exclusion on
grounds of professional misconduct proven by any means which the contracting authorities can justify.

6.
As mentioned at point 4, the Community Directives relating to public procurement foresee that a
service provider, supplier or contractor, who has been guilty of grave professional misconduct proven by
any means which the contracting authorities can justify, may be excluded from participation in a contract.

7.

In the light of the above, it is not necessary to take any supplementary measure.

(2003/C 161 E/066)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3083/02

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(28 October 2002)

Subject: Failure in Sweden of EIB preferential loans for small businesses

There is much talk from political quarters in the European Union of protecting and promoting small and
medium-sized enterprises. Preferential loans for such businesses is one method of assisting them. Because
of its high standing, the EIB is able to lend money on preferential terms. The overriding objective of the
EIB is to promote development in the EU and integration between the Member States.

In 2001, Föreningssparbanken became the first Swedish bank to conclude an agreement with the EIB to
offer preferential loans to small and medium-sized businesses. Within the framework of a ‘global loan’,
Föreningssparbanken had the facility to lend some SEK 400 million, which was primarily intended to
finance small businesses’ investments in infrastructure and industry.

A year later, however, in May 2002, it was noted that the EIB’s partner had not lent a single krona of the
amount earmarked. The bank had had numerous inquiries but the customers thought that the benefits
were poor in relation to the terms. The bank in Sweden had hoped to be able to deliver something of
benefit to its corporate customers. The idea was that the EIB loan would be cheaper than the commercial
banks’ but in May 2002 it was observed that compared with Föreningssparbanken’s normal business loans,
the difference in interest rates was not even half a percent but rather 10 to 20 percentage points, which
was not particularly advantageous for borrowers.

Another reason for entrepreneurs’ lack of interest was the additional administrative work. The involvement
of the EIB means that yet another party demands scrutiny of the company, which may be reasonable but is
also a source of irritation. As the EIB is a participating party, it must in some way take part in the lending
process but, at the same time, the risk remains with Föreningssparbanken.

In what way will the Commission take this experience from Sweden into account when it discusses setting
up preferential loans for small and medium-sized businesses and the terms and conditions for them?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(3 December 2002)

According to the European Investiment Bank (EIB), the arrangements with FöreningsSparbanken have been
in place for a relatively short time and have not yet led to full implementation. Nevertheless, progress is
being made on identifying suitable final beneficiaries and full allocation of the Global Loan can be
expected in due course in line with experience with Global loans programmes in other Member States.

C 161 E/64

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

10.7.2003

This programme is funded from EIB’s own resources and does not involve any financial support from the
Community budget. The terms and conditions of the loans are exclusively determined by the EIB according
to their normal practice.

The improved availability of medium and long term funding in the Swedish market should in itself be of
independent of its pricing which, nevertheless,
prime value to small and medium enterprises (SMEs),
remains competitive with alternative products. The EIB’s priority remains to promote the availability of a
wider range of financial products in favour of SMEs, including new products as and when they become
available.

(2003/C 161 E/067)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3085/02

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(28 October 2002)

Subject: Competition on the feed market in Sweden

Some farmers in Sweden fear that competition on the Swedish feed market will be undermined once
Svenska Lantmännen takes over a minority holding of 49 % in Svenska Foder. Although Svenska
Lantmännen says that its Danish partner DLG will have operational responsibility, two directors’ posts will
fall to Svenska Lantmännen. It is not improbable either that Svenska Lantmännen and DLG will merge in
the future. In the agricultural sector, collaboration between the two companies may be strengthened.

Will the Commission examine this case to assess whether there is a risk that competition on the Swedish
feed market will now deteriorate?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(6 December 2002)

According to a press release from the Danish agribusiness group DLG, it appears that DLG, under an
agreement with the Swedish agribusiness group Svenska Lantmännen, has indeed acquired a 51 % stake in
Svenska Foder AB, a Swedish company which operates inter alia on the animal feed market in southern
Sweden. Under the same agreement Svenska Lantmännen acquires 49 % of Svenska Foder.

DLG, in the said press release, also states that it will, in accordance with the competition rules, notify the
relevant agreements to the Swedish competition authorities.

It would seem, therefore, that the Swedish authorities will examine this transaction on the basis of the
relevant national legislation and asses whether there is a risk that competition on the Swedish feed market
will now deteriorate.

If, however,
would examine the case.

it would appear that the criteria for Community dimension are fulfilled, the Commission

(2003/C 161 E/068)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3087/02

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(28 October 2002)

Subject: State aid to the German pulp industry

According to the newspaper Dagens Industri, on 17 September 2002 the Commission approved state aid
and loan guarantees totalling SEK 6,5 billion to a huge pulp plant at Stendal in Germany. The Swedish
company Södra claims that the German state aid is a direct blow to their plans for expansion. Swedish