WRITTEN QUESTION E-3474/02 by Ioannis Marínos (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Strange conditions in notice of recruitment of officials in Greece.
Date: 2002-12-06
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU aid, EU control, Greece, allowances and expenses, civil servant, equal treatment, job access, recruitment

7.11.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 268 E/35

(2003/C 268 E/039)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3470/02

by Luis Berenguer Fuster (PSE) to the Commission

(6 December 2002)

Subject: Shortfall in revenue from electricity sales in Spain (cid:1) possible illegal state aid?

According to the Spanish Government’s proposals concerning electricity tariffs, the electricity companies’
revenue shortfall will be made good (during the 2003-2010 period) by means of a new tariff component
which the companies will be legally entitled to charge.

These proposals may well constitute a new attempt by the Spanish Government to allocate indirect aid to
Spanish electricity companies by granting the official authorisation which it was required to withdraw in
the case of power and heat supply stations, on account of the Commission’s unequivocal stance on the
matter.

Does the Commission not consider that such proposals may involve the provision of illegal state aid to
Spain’s electricity companies?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(24 January 2003)

On 25 July 2001 the Commission decided, in the light of the state aid rules, not to raise any objection to
the transitional scheme for competition transition costs (CTCs) on the electricity market in Spain (1).

It has not been informed of the definitive version of the new system of electricity tariffs in Spain. However,
according to the preliminary explanations provided by the Spanish authorities, the new system does not at
the moment entail any substantial change in the CTC scheme, particularly as regards either total CTCs or
the maximum duration of
the scheme in line with
the scheme. Accordingly,
Article 88(3) of the EC Treaty does not seem necessary.

fresh notification of

In any event, the Commission is determined to ensure that the conditions laid down in its decision of
25 July 2001 are complied with by the Spanish authorities and, in this connection, it will examine the
annual reports on the application of that decision that they are required to send to the Commission and
any legislative or regulatory change in the way CTCs are applied.

(1) Decision of 25 July 2001 in Case NN 49/59 Spain (OJ C 268, 22.9.2001). The full text of the decision is available

at the following Internet site: http:/europa.eu.int/comm/secretariat_general/sgb/state/_aids.

(2003/C 268 E/040)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3474/02

by Ioannis Marínos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(6 December 2002)

Subject: Strange conditions in notice of recruitment of officials in Greece

A notice has been published in Greece announcing the recruitment of agronomists and economists for an
indefinite period by Opekepe, the organisation for payment and control of Community aid from the
EAGGF, which comes under the Greek Ministry for Agriculture. Among the qualifications for recruitment,
reference is made to ‘the availability and use of a car for official journeys outside the place of employment’.
The posts concerned involve travelling to olive-producing regions in Greece at least three weeks a month.
Moreover, Opekepe is a supervisory body working on behalf of the Greek Government and the European
Union, which jointly finance the programmes for monitoring the use of Community aid.

C 268 E/36

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

7.11.2003

is the Commission’s view of

the above condition of recruitment? Does it not give rise to
What
discrimination and distortion of competition among the candidates for the posts since those who can
afford to own a car are given a fundamental advantage? Furthermore, it follows that those candidates who
are recruited and who own a car will be required to use their vehicle for official journeys. How are they to
be compensated (cid:1) if indeed they are to be compensated (cid:1) for the use of their cars and for related costs
(wear and tear, spare parts, servicing, fuel, insurance etc.)? What action can the Commission take (given
that it is a party to the joint funding of the programme for monitoring aid for olive oil) to remove this
strange condition of employment referred to in the above notice of recruitment of new officials?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(14 January 2003)

There is no Community legislation concerning the inclusion in job advertisements of the requirement that
the candidate should have ‘the availability and use of car for official
journeys outside the place of
employment’. The issue at question falls within the competence of the Member States.

As for the reimbursement of the expenditure incurred by the recruited candidates owing to the use of their
own car for official journeys, also this issue falls within the competence of the Member States, where the
matter may be regulated by legislation, collective agreements or contracts of employment.

This state of affairs is not influenced by the fact that Commission is participating in the joint funding of
the programme for monitoring aid for olive oil.

Since the issues in question fall within the jurisdiction of the national authorities, the Commission cannot
intervene in this occasion.

(2003/C 268 E/041)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3487/02

by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(9 December 2002)

Subject: Gibraltar’s Tax Regime

Gibraltar, like the Republic of Ireland and other Member States, has used low corporation tax as a way of
is investigating the
attracting business to the territory. There are reports that Commissioner Monti
possibility that these lower rates of tax constitute state aid.

Are these reports accurate, and, if so, does the Commission accept that the lower rates of taxation are
offered equally to corporations from all EU Member States, and that Gibraltar’s tax regime is, therefore,
entirely non-discriminatory as between Member States? Does the Commission have evidence that
Gibraltarian companies are privileged in the way that, say, the French Electricity utility Electricité de
France appears to be?

Can the Commission confirm that it does not regard lower rates of non-discriminatory corporation tax as
a form of state aid, and that any moves towards tax harmonisation require unanimity in the Council of
Ministers under the existing European Treaties?

Does the Commission accept that it has an obligation to respect the provisions of Article 12 of the
Consolidated Treaty Establishing the European Community which prevent discrimination on grounds of
nationality? Does the Commission also accept that for the Commission to produce a Directive, such as that
pertaining to the European Single Sky, excluding a part of the European Community which does not wish
to be excluded, constitutes a violation of the European Treaties which can be brought before the European
Court of Justice?