WRITTEN QUESTION E-1544/03 by Carlos Westendorp y Cabeza (PSE) to the Council. System for trading greenhouse gas emission allowances.
Date: 2003-05-07
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Council of the European Union, common position, competition law, industrial restructuring, iron and steel industry, reduction of gas emissions, single market, tradeable emission permit

26.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51 E/107

Concerning the earthquake in Greece of September 1999, the Council granted by virtue of Decision 2000/
786 EC EUR 2 million to Greece in order to compensate partially for the interest paid in 2000 on loans
from the EIB for the reconstruction of buildings, infrastructure and industrial installation affected by this
earthquake. Given the limited nature of this grant, no special reporting requirements on its implementation
were provided.

(2004/C 51 E/119)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1544/03

by Carlos Westendorp y Cabeza (PSE) to the Council

Subject: System for trading greenhouse gas emission allowances

(7 May 2003)

As regards the proposal for a directive establishing a scheme for greenhouse-gas emission allowance
trading, its entry into force might have worrying consequences for certain sectors, since it does not take
account of important points such as:

1.

2.

3.

4.

the fact that companies with production units in various European countries might adopt different or
even contradictory provisions;

indirect emissions produced outside the premises of a business but caused by the energy sources used
in them (such as blast-furnace gases),

distortions of competition which may arise between sectors and countries,

the transmission of rights corresponding to the transfer of capacity as the result of the closure of
plants belonging to one and the same group.

All this seriously restricts the margin for adjusting to the directive for businesses in the steel sector, for
specific reasons such as the impossibility of passing on cost increases (a limited number of customers and
suppliers of raw materials), the fact that there are only two ways of manufacturing steel (blast furnaces and
electric furnaces (cid:1) both directly affected by the Directive) and the recycling of gases from blast furnaces
(which reduce CO2 emissions when generating energy, although, paradoxically, the allowances are not
granted to industry but to the energy companies).

Will the Council bear these points in mind in order to avoid seriously jeopardising the restructuring of a
sector which was finally beginning to be consolidated at Community level?

Reply

(2 October 2003)

The Council adopted its common position on the proposal for a Directive establishing a scheme for
greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community and amending Council Directive 96/61/
EC on 18 March 2003. Its provisions strike a balance between the advantages of a Community-wide
scheme and the principle, of subsidiarity and proportionality, while contributing to the fulfilment of the
joint commitments of the Community and its Member States under the Kyoto Protocol in a cost-effective
manner.

Among the key objectives of the Common Position are to ensure the proper functioning of the internal
market and to avoid distortions of competition. The Common Position contains such Community-level
provisions relating to the allocation of allowances that are necessary to pursue those objectives. Thus, the
Member States determine the total quantities of allowances to be allocated, consistently with their
respective obligations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, on the basis of a set of common criteria aiming
to ensure a level playing field for all participants in the scheme.

Like the Kyoto Protocol, the Common Position addresses direct emissions.

C 51 E/108

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

26.2.2004

With regard to transfer of allowances, the Common Position allows transfers between operators within a
Member State or between Member States without restrictions beyond those provided for by the Kyoto
Protocol and decisions thereunder, and initial allocations are made to operators rather than installations.

In conclusion, the introduction of a EU-wide market for emission allowances should not be considered as
an obstacle to the restructuring of the steel sector.

(2004/C 51 E/120)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1553/03

by Lord Inglewood (PPE-DE) to the Council

(2 May 2003)

Subject: Export of cultural goods

When does the Council intend to review the effectiveness of Council Regulation (EC) No 3911/92 (1) on
the export of cultural goods?

(1) OJ L 395, 31.12.1992, p. 1.

Reply

(2 October 2003)

According to the Regulation (CEE) no 3911/92 the Commission submits a report of the application of the
Regulation. The last report of the Commission was submitted in May 2000, thus the following report is
due in 2003. The Council will examine the report on the application of the Regulation after having
received the next Commission report.

(2004/C 51 E/121)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1556/03

by Maurizio Turco (NI) to the Commission

(2 May 2003)

Subject: Proceedings launched under Articles 85 and 226 of

the Treaty establishing the European

Community in respect of Italian companies and the Italian Government

In the light of its reply to Written Question P-0770/03 (1),

given that under Article 85 of the EC Treaty the Commission, ‘on application by a Member State or on its
own initiative, and in cooperation with the competent authorities in the Member States, who shall give it
their assistance, (…) shall investigate cases of suspected infringement’, and

since Article 226 of the EC Treaty states that ‘if the Commission considers that a Member State has failed
to fulfil an obligation under this Treaty, it shall deliver a reasoned opinion on the matter after giving the
State concerned the opportunity to submit its observations’,

would the Commission answer the following questions:

(cid:1) has it launched proceedings, under Article 85 of the EC Treaty and during the current parliamentary
term, relating to suspected infringements on the part of Italian companies? What are the suspected
infringements and how many cases are involved? Were the proceedings initiated on application by a
Member State or on the Commission’s own initiative? Which proceedings are still open?

(cid:1) during the current parliamentary term, what proceedings has the Commission launched under
Article 226 of the EC Treaty in respect of suspected infringements by the Italian Government of the
obligations laid down in the Treaty, and how many cases are involved? Which of those proceedings
have been closed, which of them have led to a request for Italy to submit its observations and which
of them have led to the issue of a reasoned opinion?

(1) OJ C 33 E, 6.2.2004, p. 79.