WRITTEN QUESTION E-0643/03 by Paul Rübig (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Research spending and Basel II.
Date: 2003-03-04
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: applied research, expenditure, financial management, financial solvency, management accounting, small and medium-sized enterprises, standard

15.1.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 11 E/101

As the Honourable Members know, responding to pollution incidents is primarily the responsibility
4.
of the Member States. The Commission’s role is mainly to support cooperation among national competent
authorities.

The Commission’s European Response Centre was in contact with the Belgian, French and Dutch
authorities following the Tricolor accident.

In this context, the only request for assistance the Commission has received came from the Belgian
authorities concerning the cleaning of oiled birds.

(1) OJ C 151 E, 25.6.2002.
(2) COM(2000) 802 final.
(3) COM(2002) 681 final.

(2004/C 11 E/101)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0643/03

by Paul Rübig (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(4 March 2003)

Subject: Research spending and Basel II

The Lisbon process stresses that technology-based firms are expected to provide a positive impetus,
particularly as regards the creation of new jobs. However, in contrast to the International Accounting
Standard, development activity on the part of many technology-based SMEs cannot be capitalised, with the
result that these firms have a correspondingly high level of negative equity. Arrangements therefore need
to be made for technology-based SMEs through Basel II which take account of the fact that the level of
negative equity is not a product of poor management but of research-intensive activity.

How are research spending and operational
procedures conducted by banks or rating agencies?

investment treated in current internal or external rating

What consequences arise from the choice of rating procedure or from differences in the rating methods
used by large or regional banks?

How high is the proportion of firms whose credit-worthiness has been increased, reduced or kept at the
same level as a result of the application of Basel II?

What differences exist in this respect between various sectors and sizes of firm?

How does the Commission assess these factors? Will it draw on them in its preparatory work on the
implementation of Basel II in the EU?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(10 April 2003)

The questions raised by the Honourable Member are important issues for the European economy. Credit
including of course technology-oriented
financing for small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs),
companies, should receive a proportionate treatment under the new capital adequacy regime. This is an
important issue for the Commission, which has underlined this fact already several
times. Actually
compared to the second consultative document, Basel has changed its proposal in relation to the treatment
of SMEs significantly. The Commission will in the ongoing negotiations in Basel seek to ensure that the
proportionate treatment of SMEs is maintained.

C 11 E/102

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

15.1.2004

Regarding the Honourable Member’s specific concerns, the new proposed Regulation (1) does not contain
requirements, which prescribe institutions how to develop their rating systems and what kind of risk
factors they have to take into account. The new requirements simply stress that all relevant available
information must be taken into account.

Thus under Basel II as it is up to now, it remains within the responsibility of the financial institutions,
which factors they take into account and how these factors are weighted in the assessment of the credit
quality of their borrowers. This also applies to the question whether rating systems of financial institutions
differentiate between industry sectors and the size of the company.

What will change with Basel II is the fact that, if an institute would like to use its internal ratings for the
regulatory capital calculation, the responsible supervisor will now have to check the reliability of this
rating system. This should improve the quality of these systems and should have no negative effect for
SMEs.

The Commission would like to assure the Honourable Member of the importance it attaches to the
treatment of SMEs.

(1) http://europa.eu.int/comm/internal_market/en/finances/capitaladequacy/index.htm.

(2004/C 11 E/102)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0645/03

by Koldo Gorostiaga Atxalandabaso (NI) to the Commission

(4 March 2003)

Subject: 2002 annual debate on an area of freedom, security and justice

On 12 February, during the 2002 annual debate on an area of freedom, security and justice, I asked the
Council Office and Commissioner Vitorino the following questions, without receiving any response from
them.

In the Kingdom of Spain on 13 February 1981, that is to say 22 years ago, Joseba Arregi, a Basque
political prisoner, died under torture while he was in police custody.

In 2002, 634 politically motivated people were arrested. 127 of them subsequently claimed in court that
they had suffered ill treatment or torture.

Has the Commission received clear information about this issue from the Spanish Government?

Does the Commission consider that
Government?

the transparency principle has been respected by the Spanish

Last year the Spanish Government proposed banning several social organisations (cid:1) media and cultural
associations (cid:1) that had denounced the political repression suffered by Basque dissidents. As a result of a
Spanish initiative, the European Union has drawn up a black list of associations and individuals accused of
specific or tacit support for terrorism. The accused have neither legal means of defence nor effective access
to the courts.

Does the Commission consider there has been real enforcement of the democratic control principle with
regard to Spain?

Will the Commission put forward a judicial instrument, in the new texts being drafted, for those included
on the European Union’s black list?