WRITTEN QUESTION E-3898/02 by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Community support for small and medium-sized enterprises.
Date: 2003-01-14
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU aid, EU financial instrument, EU programme, Portugal, Structural Funds, aid system, economic development, economic policy, exchange of information, small and medium-sized enterprises

C 268 E/60

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

7.11.2003

(2003/C 268 E/061)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3898/02

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(14 January 2003)

Subject: Community support for small and medium-sized enterprises

Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) make up 99 % of the 18 million firms in the EU, not counting
the agricultural sector, where small businesses predominate. These enterprises employ about 66 % of the
whole workforce and account for about 55 % of total turnover. Their socio-economic importance and also
their contribution towards making the business world dynamic, promoting innovation and creating new
jobs are obvious. SMEs have problems and weaknesses inherent in their size, especially as far as financing
is concerned, which will be aggravated by the reduction in economic activity and the increasing
intensification of competition. These problems are greater in the most disadvantaged areas of the EU.

According to Commission data, the financial arrangements for 1994-1999 benefited 800 000 SMEs in the
EU, granting them 18 % of Structural Fund assistance. Between 1994 and 1998 the R & D framework
programme benefited around 15 000 SMEs, giving them 20 % of the total allocation. In 1999 the SME
mechanism benefited 4 336 SMEs in the EU and 53 879 jobs were created, with a total investment of
approximately EUR 3 800 million. There are two important
instruments managed by the European
Investment Fund: the SME Guarantee Facility, with around EUR 168 million between 1998 and 2000, and
the European Technology Facility.

In this context, can the Commission answer the following questions:

1. How is the total of Community aid for SMEs allocated and what was the total number of beneficiary

SMEs in each Member State in the periods 1994-1999 and 2000-2001?

2. How many Portuguese SMEs have so far benefited from the SME Guarantee Facility and the European
Technology Facility? What was the volume of aid involved and what is the Commission’s opinion of
these facilities in Portugal?

3. What instruments and forms of Community aid exist to support associations of SMEs and to promote

the formation of such associations?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(4 March 2003)

1.
Two summary tables of Community aid for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are given in
Annex I, which is sent direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat. These provide an
overview of various types of Community action (grants, loans, guarantees, etc.) covering different periods.
The amounts cannot, therefore, be added together. They include major instruments and programmes, but
are not intended to be exhaustive. The figures are estimates.

For the SME Guarantee Facility, more detailed information is given in Annex II, which is sent direct to the
Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat. For this Facility, it is not relevant to provide figures
on investments, as this is a guarantee scheme. The figures, therefore, refer to the aggregate guarantee
volume currently included in its portfolio.

Regarding the Structural Funds’ assistance, according to the thematic evaluation ‘Structural Funds Impact
on SMEs’ published in July 1999, SME measures amounted to ECU 13,5 billion of total Structural Fund
expenditure in Objective 1 regions (14,5 %) under the 1994-1999 programmes. SMEs are likely to have
benefited significantly from a further ECU 11,8 billion (12,6 %) Structural Funds outlays in Objective 1
regions, although this was not targeted directly to them. A breakdown of the number of beneficiary SMEs
by Member State and region (objective) is given in Annex III a, which is sent direct to the Honourable
Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat.

7.11.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 268 E/61

Concerning the data requested for the period 2000-2001, the available data represent the amounts of the
programmed actions and the latest accepted amounts of the actions that were programmed, rather than
any data indicating output, since the programming period 2000-2006 is still ongoing. These accepted
amounts are shown in Annex III b. Therefore, while it would be possible to provide a breakdown by
Member State for the assistance foreseen by the Structural Funds for the programmed actions, such a
document would end up being very long and difficult to use. Instead, it might be useful to know that for
Portugal, in November 2002, an amount of EUR 2 657 million had already been accepted as foreseen
Structural Funds’ assistance to SMEs.

It is not possible to provide a breakdown by Member State for all the instruments and programmes
included in the summary tables.

2.

Concerning data on Portuguese SMEs benefiting from the SME Guarantee Facility, see point 1.

Concerning the ‘European Technology Facility’ (ETF), it has been assumed that it is the ETF Start-up Facility
that is meant.

Based on the European Investment Fund (EIF) reporting to the Commission, as at 30 September 2002
under the SME Guarantee Facility, 58 SMEs had received 61 loans guaranteed by the Portuguese
intermediary SPGM. The average loan size was EUR 545 576.

No Portuguese SMEs have benefited yet under ETF Start-up. However, on 28 November 2001, the
Commission approved an investment of up to EUR 10 million in a Portuguese generalist venture capital
fund (VCF). This fund is focusing on innovative SMEs with high growth potential in Portugal (80 %) and
Galicia (20 %). Due to legal problems in setting-up the VCF, including finalisation of its legal structure, the
closing of the fund was delayed. The legal issues were solved with the help of the EIF and the Community
and the closing finally took place in December 2002. The fund will target a broad range of sectors and
focus on SMEs in the development stage, taking into consideration both the small size of the Portuguese
market and the need for risk diversification in an environment where deal flow for high-tech investments
is limited. The VCF is now in a position to start investing in final beneficiary SMEs in accordance with its
planned five-year investment period.

The Commission has just completed an overall evaluation of
Initiative
(1998-2000), which includes the SME Guarantee Facility and ETF Start-up Facility. This concluded that
both instruments are working well and thus supports the decision to continue them within the framework
of the Multiannual programme for enterprise and entrepreneurship, and in particular for SMEs (2001-
2005). It should be remembered that the allocation of funds in different Member States under these
instruments depends on the number and quality of the proposals received by the EIF and on the
subsequent capacity of the selected national financial intermediaries to use the funds. The reality is that
there has been relatively low demand for both instruments from Portugal.

the Growth & Employment

3.

No Community aid is given to support business organisations as such and their operating costs.

However, SME organisations are increasingly sought after as interlocutors and multipliers regarding
Community policies. This stronger interest of the Commission gives them indirectly better arguments
towards their members (companies or business organisations) to get more core funding or staff for their
activities.

The Commission SME Envoy, nominated in December 2001, aims to establish an active interface with the
SME Business Community, including improvement of the regular dialogue with SME associations.

As a general rule, Community programmes aim to stimulate the establishment of groupings of SME, by
requiring the participation of SMEs from different countries in project applications. An example is the
Collective Research scheme, which is a new scheme under the Sixth RTD Framework Programme, set up in
the context of
is explicitly addressed to SME
associations or groupings. The objective is to expand the knowledge base of larger communities of SMEs
that face common challenges. In addition, SME associations or groupings represent an alternative route for
SMEs to participate in the Priority Thematic Areas of the ‘Integrating & Strengthening’ Specific Programme
of the Sixth Framework Programme.

the horizontal research activities involving SMEs.

It

C 268 E/62

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

7.11.2003

As to the Structural Funds, the Portuguese operational programme for the economy, in the framework of
the Community Support Framework III
foresees specific measures to support SME
associations. These measures support projects presented by enterprise associations, aiming to strengthen
their capacity in the areas of cooperation and internationalisation. They also foresee support to the
development of dynamic strategic partnerships between the various SME associations as well as between
these and the public institutions.

(2000-2006),

Indirect support to SME associations is also given through the Multiannual programme for enterprise and
entrepreneurship, and in particular for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)
(2001-2005). For
example, the Commission has, in this framework, launched a project to increase SMEs’ participation and
support their interests within the European standardisation process.

(2003/C 268 E/062)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3911/02

by Dirk Sterckx (ELDR) to the Commission

(14 January 2003)

Subject: Application of Directive 2000/14/EC to cooling equipment in trucks

The revision of the European regulation governing social provisions in the road haulage sector has once
again made the compulsory rest periods which lorry drivers must take a topical issue. In practice, drivers
would not seem to be able to take this much-needed rest whenever they want, because cooling equipment
fitted to trucks causes noise pollution when such trucks are parked overnight so that the driver can sleep.
Directive 2000/14/EC (1) on noise emission by equipment for use outdoors stipulates only that such
cooling equipment must carry an official mark and sets no noise emission limit.

Can the Commission state why no noise emission limit has been imposed on cooling equipment and
whether it agrees that the directive should perhaps be revised so that lorry drivers are no longer faced with
noise pollution of this kind?

(1) OJ L 162, 3.7.2000, p. 1.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(28 February 2003)

When the Commission made its proposal for Directive 2000/14/EC (1) on noise emission by equipment for
use outdoors, insufficient data was available to set noise emission limit values for cooling equipment on
vehicles. Such equipment was therefore included under the scope of Article 13 of the Directive which
requires the guaranteed sound power level of equipment to be subject to noise marking only.

The noise requirements under the Directive are set so as to protect citizen’s health and the environment,
but do not specifically target protection against noise in the workplace, including the noise experienced by
drivers of trucks equipped with cooling equipment.

Article 20 of the Directive foresees a review process with regular reports from 2005 and onwards from the
Commission to the Parliament and the Council on its experience in the implementation and administration
of the Directive, including an assessment of whether any equipment falling under the scope Article 13
could be moved to Article 12 which requires compliance with limit values.

In the context of this review process, the Commission will assess whether the available data, including that
collected under the Directive, suggest that it could be revised by introducing noise limit values on cooling
equipment on vehicles.

(1) Directive 2000/14/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 8 May 2000 on the approximation of the laws of the
Member States relating to the noise emission in the environment by equipment for use outdoors, OJ L 162,
3.7.2000.