WRITTEN QUESTION E-3147/02 by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission. Use of EU funding by metropolitan areas.
Date: 2002-11-04
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU financing, European Union, Structural Funds, action programme, capital city, quality of life, statistics, urban area, urban centre, use of aid

18.9.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 222 E/49

The Commission will send the above comments to the relevant authorities in the Member State, to draw
their attention to them and to arrive at a solution which is in accordance with Community legislation and
consistent with current programming.

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.
(2) Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 of 17 May 1999 on support for rural development from the European
Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) and amending and repealing certain Regulations (cid:1) OJ L 160,
26.6.1999.

(2003/C 222 E/053)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3147/02

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(4 November 2002)

Subject: Use of EU funding by metropolitan areas

In many European cities the problems of social cohesion and sustainable development are among the most
pressing: damage to the environment is being matched by a deterioration in the quality of life of city-
dwellers. For this reason, in recent years the European Union has launched a wide range of measures
designed to improve our cities and the quality of life of their inhabitants.

However, on a number of occasions the Commission has emphasised that not enough use is being made
of European funding by local authorities, even though such resources are clearly needed to deal with
extensive social, economic and environmental problems.

In the light of the above, can the Commission state whether:

1. A comprehensive study of metropolitan areas has been carried out?

2. An action plan has been drawn up for each metropolitan area, in particular European capitals?

3. A comparison has been drawn up of the extent to which European capitals use the funding available?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(11 December 2002)

The Commission, in cooperation with Eurostat, has for some years been using a set of indicators called the
Urban Audit to assess the quality of life in European cities. The findings of the first phase (cid:1) Urban Audit I,
based on a sample of 58 cities (cid:1) were published in May 2000. Urban Audit II, which will cover
approximately 170 European cities including all capital cities, is in the course of being lauched and the
findings should be available by early 2004.

Under the Interreg III Community Initiative, the Commission is part-financing a programme called the
European Spatial Planning Observatory Network (ESPON).

Applying the principles of the European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP), the programme recently
launched inter alia the following three studies:

(cid:1) urban areas’ role, situation and potential as nodes of polycentric development;

(cid:1) town-countryside relations in Europe;

(cid:1) the Structural Funds’ territorial impact on urban areas.

These studies, whose initial findings are expected by mid-2003, will examine the territorial disparities
which exist in a number of urban and metropolitan areas.

As regards the possibility of an action plan drawn up at Community level for each capital, the Commission
does not envisage any such initiative because responsibility for this rests with the Member States’
authorities in accordance with the subsidiarity principle.

C 222 E/50

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

18.9.2003

Capital cities may access Community Funds and in particular the Structural Funds via national programmes
(Objective 3), and in some
(Objectives 1 and 2,
Community Initiatives Urban II and Interreg III).

and local programmes

cases via

regional

Given the above and the fact that the system for implementing the Funds is decentralised, the Commission
does not have information on capital cities’ comparative use of the Funds.

(2003/C 222 E/054)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3161/02

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(5 November 2002)

Subject: International companies such as McDonald’s which can ignore the European social model, national

rules and the green paper on social responsibility

Is the Commission aware that the American fast-food chain McDonald’s, whose business has grown
1.
spectacularly in Europe and which has recruited many young employees,
is threatening branches in
Germany with closure if the employees set up a works council, and that in the United Kingdom it does not
trade union members, does not conclude any collective
permit
agreements on terms of employment, and pays lower than standard wage rates?

the recruitment or promotion of

2.
Is the Commission aware that the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) and the
unions affiliated to it believe that in many cases these problems exceed the capacity of the individual EU
Member States to intervene effectively and that it is therefore highly desirable that action should now be
taken at European level against these practices which conflict with what is generally accepted as the
European social model?

3. Will the Commission, while acknowledging the powers of national authorities and the application of
national legislation, take the initiative to coordinate at European level measures to reprimand this large
business and any other international violators of national rules?

4. What will the Commission do to combat the abuse of internal borders and the undermining of the
relationship between employers and employees which is customary in Europe and to eliminate the
competitive advantages which these abuses confer in comparison with businesses which comply with the
law and with collective agreements on terms of employment?

In the light of

5.
the green paper on Promoting a European Framework for Corporate Social
Responsibility (1), what possible penalties could be imposed on businesses which permanently seek to
disregard recommendations relating to the recruitment and retention of skilled workers, lifelong learning,
improving the position of employees, better information throughout the company, a better balance
between work, family life and leisure, greater work force diversity, equal pay and career prospects for
women, profit-sharing and share ownership schemes, and concern for employability and job security?

Source: Dutch newspaper De Volkskrant, 8 October 2002.

(1) COM(2001) 366 final of 18 July 2001.

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(6 January 2003)

The Honourable Member’s allegations about the conduct of the company in question with regard to pay,
the right of association and freedom of collective bargaining do not come within the scope of any
Community legislation.
Indeed, the EC Treaty rules out any action by the Community to establish
minimum requirements in these areas on the basis of Article 137 (see Article 137(6) of the EC Treaty).
With this in mind, and in the absence of any link between the facts described and Community law, the
Commission does not have the authority to intervene.