WRITTEN QUESTION E-1574/03 by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission. State aid approval for coal mine methane extraction.
Date: 2003-05-08
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: State aid, United Kingdom, climate change, coal industry, control of State aid, exchange of information, hydrocarbon, mining operation, tax exemption

C 58 E/80

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

6.3.2004

From a European perspective, the role of the statutory auditor does not include a specific duty in
3.
relation to tax advice or other forms of advice but deals exclusively with providing an opinion on the true
and fair view of financial statements.

The responsibility of the statutory auditor is to perform thorough audits of the financial statements
4.
in the public interest. Business and financial relationships and the provision of non-audit services to the
audit client may not undermine this responsibility. This does not imply a strict prohibition of non audit
services. The Commission is aware that there is pressure to restrict even further the possibility for an
auditor to provide additional services and will conduct a study on the impact of a more restrictive
approach.

This study is one of the actions included in the Communication on reinforcing statutory audit in the
Union which the Commission issued on 21 May 2003. The provision of additional services is prohibited
in Greece, France and Italy (for listed companies).

Public oversight of the audit profession in the Union is one of the other priorities in the Communication.
From a European perspective,
it is important that Member States’ oversight fulfils certain (functional)
quality criteria. However, the structure of oversight is primarily a responsibility for Member States.

5.
The aforementioned study into the consequences of a strict(er) prohibition as well as the practical
experience with the implementation of the Commission Recommendation, will allow the Commission to
decide in due course whether and which further action may be needed in this area.

(1) OJ L 191, 19.7.2002.

(2004/C 58 E/097)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1574/03

by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission

(8 May 2003)

Subject: State aid approval for coal mine methane extraction

Has the Commission received an application from the UK Government for state aid approval to grant the
coal mine methane industry an 80 % exemption from the UK climate change levy?

If so, what response has the Commission made or when will it do so?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(16 June 2003)

The Commission has not received an application from the British Government for state aid approval to
grant the coal mine methane industry an 80 % exemption from the British Climate Change Levy (CCL).

the
The Commission has, however, received a notification from the British Government
production of electricity using coal mine methane a full exemption from the British CCL. The Commission
has opened the formal investigation procedure according to Article 88(2) EC Treaty on this notification as
it has doubts, at first sight, that the aid granted is compatible with State aid rules. This decision was
published in the Official Journal (1), and third parties were invited to submit comments within one month
from the date of publication. The Commission has received third party’s comments at the end of April

to grant

6.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 58 E/81

2003 and forwarded them according to Article 6(2) of the Procedural Regulation (2) to the British
authorities for a reply within one month. The Commission is awaiting the reply of the British authorities
and will then take a final decision.

(1) OJ C 69, 22.3.2003, p. 9.
(2) Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of 22.3.1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of

the EC Treaty, OJ L 83, 27.3.1999.

(2004/C 58 E/098)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1615/03

by Joan Vallvé (ELDR) to the Commission

(13 May 2003)

Subject: Aid for rice growing

The Commission Communication to the Council and the European Parliament of 10 July 2002 (1) stated,
in the section on rice (p. 15 of the English version of the text):

The global price reduction will be compensated at a rate of 88 % … This leads to compensation of
177 EUR/t, … Of this, 102 EUR/t multiplied by the 1995 reform yield would become an income
payment paid per farm. The remaining 75 EUR/t multiplied by the 1995 reform yield would be paid
as a crop specific aid reflecting the role of rice production in traditional production areas.

This additional aid recognising the specific characteristics of traditional rice-growing areas was particularly
welcome in areas such as the Ebro y Pals delta in Baix Empordà, Girona, where rice production has been
well established for some time. Although they did not agree with the basic philosophy behind the
Commission proposals nor the future prospects indicated for this crop, the rice growers and the Catalan
Government alike considered that this additional aid could alleviate, if only partly, the loss of income
which application of the reform would entail.

However, in the text of the legislative proposals submitted in January 2003, this specific aid has been
extended to all areas of rice production, with no territorial differentiation, and based on establishing a
basic area of cultivation for each country and imposing penalties if this is exceeded. In the case of Spain,
the area laid down is 104 973 hectares.

This new approach will greatly exacerbate the damage that the CAP reform will inflict on Catalan rice
growers, since they cultivate areas where there are no alternative crops and, in addition, their crops have
great ecological value as most of these areas are protected by the Ramsar Treaty. If rice production is no
longer viable, this will not only have a considerable impact on incomes, but will also damage ecosystems
and eventually threaten the survival of an exceptional environment which is unique in Europe.

Does the Commission not think that, for these areas of great ecological value, the specific aid that was laid
down should be maintained in its entirety and that, if the basic area is exceeded, the penalties should not
affect the growers who are established in these areas?

(1) COM(2002) 394 final.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(17 June 2003)

Under its proposed reform of the common agricultural policy (CAP), which it presented to the Council and
Parliament in January 2003, the Commission is suggesting that specific aid for rice, under the support
regimes, should be granted to all rice producers, irrespective of their area of production.