WRITTEN QUESTION P-1596/03 by Regina Bastos (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Closure of Schuh-Union located in Ponte de Lima, Portugal.
Date: 2003-05-06
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Regional Development Fund, Northern Portugal, State aid, aid system, cessation of trading, co-financing, footwear industry, offshoring, terms for aid

C 78 E/40

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

Likewise, the EIB expects borrowers to disclose information in compliance with relevant Community
legislation; however, openness as regards other business-related or political considerations are left to the
judgement of its borrowers. The Commission understands that the EIB would have no objection to the
Borrower/Slovak Government deciding to publish the information contained in the Finance Contract
signed with the Bank.

In its White Paper on European Transport Policy for 2010: time to decide (1), the Commission
5.
formulated its aim to maintain the modal share of rail transport in 2010 at 1998 levels. In order to
increase the competitiveness of the rail mode and to allow achievement of this aim, railway undertakings
have to comply with the requirements of the amended Directive 91/440/EEC (2), which provides that
railway undertakings be managed according to the principles which apply to commercial companies. This
requirement also applies to services carried out by railway undertakings under public service contracts and
obligations concluded between the railway undertaking and the authorities of a Member State.

The loan was the Bank’s first operation in the railway sector in Slovakia. The benefits of the project were
to enable the rail company to increase its competitiveness with regard to road transport, in view of the
sharp increase of the latter in CEECs, a Union objective, which the Bank supports throughout the Union of
25. Indeed EIB activity in support of rail projects over the last five years (EUR 16,4 billion) is higher than
its support for projects in the road transport sector (EUR 13 billion). The benefits were also in line with
Slovakia’s Union Accession Partnership which specifically highlighted the need for upgrading, including
TENs corridors and restructuring in the rail sector.

Public service contracts and obligations are regulated under the amended Regulation 1191/69 (3).

6.
Slovakia has not requested a derogation for this Regulation during the accession negotiations.

Furthermore, the Commission would like to point out that it has submitted a proposal (4) for a new
Regulation on Public service contracts, which reinforces the responsibility of authorities to aim to ensure
adequate and efficient public transport services for its citizens. The Regulation would also put in place
arrangements for the transparent and competitive award of public service contracts, an approach that has
been shown in existing Member States to lead to greater efficiency (and therefore more effective use of
public finances) and higher patronage. This proposal is currently under consideration by the Council.

(1) COM(2001) 317 final, OJ C 240 E, 28.8.2001.
(2) Directive 91/440/EEC of 29 July 1991, OJ L 237, 24.8.1991, amended by Directive 2001/12/EC of the Parliament
and of the Council of 26 February 2001 on the development of the Community’s railways, OJ L 75, 15.3.2001.
(3) Regulation 1191/69/EEC of the Council of 26 June 1969, OJ L 156, 28.6.1969, as amended by Council Regulation
(EEC) No 1893/91 of 20 June 1991 on action by Member States concerning the obligations inherent in the concept
of a public service in transport by rail, road and inland waterway, OJ L 169, 29.6.1991.

(4) Amended proposal for a Regulation of the Parliament and of the Council on action by Member States concerning
public service requirements and the award of public service contracts in passenger transport by rail, road and inland
waterway, (COM(2002) 107 final (cid:1) 2000/0212(COD)), OJ C 151 E, 25.6.2002.

(2004/C 78 E/0039)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1596/03

by Regina Bastos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(6 May 2003)

Subject: Closure of ‘Schuh-Union’ located in Ponte de Lima, Portugal

The German shoe company Schuh-Union closed its factory in Ponte de Lima and more than 180 workers
lost their jobs. Management informed staff about the definitive closure by simply putting up a notice at the
entrance to the factory.

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/41

The company had drawn up a protocol guaranteeing that it would stay in Ponte de Lima for at least
20 years, but it closed down after only 12 years.

Management blamed the closure on a shortage of orders, but in actual fact the orders had been passed on
to other factories in Romania and Turkey, where labour is cheaper.

In May 2002 Schuh-Union already closed the factory at Maia (Portugal) in order to relocate to Romania,
depriving 460 workers of their jobs. At that time management claimed that the closure would enable the
factory at Ponte de Lima to maintain its full production capacity and retain all the staff.

Nevertheless, in October 2002 Schuh-Union closed the cutting and stitching section of its Ponte de Lima
factory, which immediately made 172 workers redundant.

It should be noted that 97 % of the staff are women aged between 40 and 50, who will naturally find it
difficult to find other jobs, especially in a town where there are few job opportunities.

Can the Commission therefore say:

(cid:1) whether Schuh-Union has received any Community funding;

(cid:1) if so, how much it received, when, and what conditions were imposed on the company?

Supplementary answer
given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(30 September 2003)

The Commission can inform the Honourable Member that Schuh-Union received no aid from the
European Social Fund but did receive from the European Regional Development Fund PTE 199 431 000
(part-financing of a total cost of PTE 280 735 000) for two projects, one approved on 12 November 1992
under
the programme for
modernisation of the economic fabric.

the PNICIAP programme and one approved on 2 March 1998 under

is,
These aids was allocated by Portugal under aid schemes approved by the Commission. Portugal
however, responsible for seeing that
the Community rules on competition are respected and the
Commission will ask her authorities to check if this has been the case in connection with the aid granted
to Schuh-Union.

The location of enterprises is primarily a matter for those who head them. However, under the new
regulatory provisions on Structural Fund financing for the 2000-2006 programming period, Member States
are to ensure that during the five years following the decision to grant aid no substantial project
including no ‘change of location in a productive activity’, occurs (1). The Guidelines on
modification,
national regional aid adopted by the Commission on 10 March 1998 require both capital assets financed
and jobs created to be maintained for at least five years from the time at which the aided investment was
made.

(1) Article 30(4)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999.

(2004/C 78 E/0040)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1670/03

by María Sornosa Martínez (PSE) to the Commission

(19 May 2003)

Subject: Authorisation by the Commission of projects harmful to the Natura 2000 network

At the end of April the Spanish press reported the Commission’s decision to authorise, for economic
reasons, three projects with a serious impact on the environment. The projects are the extension of the