WRITTEN QUESTION P-1696/03 by Danielle Darras (PSE) to the Commission. European funds and subcontracting.
Date: 2003-05-15
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU financing arrangements, France, Structural Funds, aid to undertakings, cessation of trading, collective dismissal, industrial restructuring, iron and steel industry

C 84 E/474

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(20 June 2003)

The Commission refers to its answer to Written Question E-3529/02 by Mr Pronk (1). In addition, the
1.
Commission would like to stress that, under Belgian law, every worker has a right to paid annual leave of
at least four weeks. Article 2 of the Consolidation Law on annual leave of 27 June 1971 provides that
workers (…) are entitled to annual leave in proportion to the work performed (…). Workers’ right to leave
is an acquired right, notwithstanding any agreement to the contrary. Workers may not waive their
entitlement to annual leave. Article 3 of the aforementioned law provides that the amount of leave is
defined by leave cycle, on the basis of the amount of services performed during the cycle. (…). Leave must
total at least twenty-four days per twelve months of work (…). For the purposes of calculating this
amount, the cycle is defined as the calendar year preceding the year in which the leave is to be granted
(…).

Belgian legislation should thus not be confused with legislation such as that in question in the Bectu
case (2), since it does not make the entitlement to paid annual leave subject to a minimum period of work
but merely defers the practical exercise of this right to the following calendar year. In the view of the
Commission, this complies with Article 7(1) (see the argument put forward in the answer to question
E-3529/02).

2.
The Commission considers that Belgian legislation does not give rise to discrimination against
migrant workers and that, as a result, it does not represent an infringement of the right to free movement
of workers (Article 39 of the EC Treaty).

(1) OJ C 137 E, 12.6.2003, p. 222.
(2) See the judgment of the European Court of Justice of 26 June 2001 in case C-173/99.

(2004/C 84 E/0548)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1696/03

by Danielle Darras (PSE) to the Commission

(15 May 2003)

Subject: European funds and subcontracting

Numerous correspondents have drawn my attention to the planned restructuring within the Arcelor group.

Under this restructuring, two factories in France (Isbergues and Ardoise) are to close, and one new factory
at Carlam, Belgium, is to open, thus reducing the total number of jobs in Arcelor. If the Commission is not
able to take account of the social consequences of this restructuring as grounds for opposing it, I should
like to know whether the Commission can oppose this kind of operation if Arcelor, or the enterprises with
which it subcontracts, receive European funding.

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(6 June 2003)

According to the records, the Sollac Florange site (which is under threat as a result of the possible
termination of Arcelor investment) has not received a contribution from the Community’s Structural Funds
for the periods 1994-1999 or 2000-2006.

In accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, both project selection and the implementation and
management of programmes cofinanced by the Structural Funds are the responsibility of the Member
States.

The Structural Funds contribute to the funding of operations which fall within the scope and eligible
activities defined in the regulations relating to the various Funds. These operations must come under the
priority areas and measures selected for assistance from the Funds covering the region concerned. In order
to receive assistance from one of the Funds, the operation must also fulfil the selection criteria approved
by a monitoring committee which ensures that the assistance is implemented properly and efficiently.

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/475

For the current programming period 2000-2006, Article 30 of the Regulation on the Structural Funds (1)
provides that an operation retains the contribution from the Funds if that operation does not, within five
years of the date of the decision awarding it, undergo a substantial modification affecting its nature or its
implementation conditions and resulting either from a cessation or change of location in a productive
activity. If this is the case, the Member State must inform the Commission and undertake the financial
corrections required, by cancelling all or part of the Community contribution.

For the previous programming periods, the regulations did not provide for any means to recover grants
awarded under the Structural Funds, provided the operations are carried out and payments made on the
basis of the legislation in force.

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds,

OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.

(2004/C 84 E/0549)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1697/03

by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

Subject: Consumer fraud involving cat and dog skins

(22 May 2003)

A BBC programme claims that hundreds of consumers in Europe are victims of fraud because they are
unwittingly buying furs manufactured in Europe from cat and dog skins.

The same programme reports that hundreds of thousands of cats and dogs worldwide are killed each year
by shady operators seeking to make a profit by selling their skins in Europe, without any clear indication
of the origin of their ‘products’.

In view of the fact that consumer protection is one of the fundamental policies of the EU, will the
Commission say what practical measures it will take to put an end to this travesty of a trade which is not
only an abhorrent practice but also constitutes consumer fraud?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(10 July 2003)

At present, the Commission has no information that confirms that cats and dogs are farmed for their fur
in the Union or in the ten Acceding Countries.

The Commission does not ignore the issue of imports of cat and dog furs. The Commission is currently
examining the questions raised taking into consideration the respective requirements of World Trade
Organisation (WTO) law, legal bases under Community law and the interplay with existing legislation to
prevent consumer deception.

(2004/C 84 E/0550)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1700/03

by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission

(22 May 2003)

Subject: Financial corrections

In its reply concerning paragraph 2.57 of the 2001 Annual Report of the Court of Auditors (1) the
Commission states ‘as part of the follow-up to the 2001 clearance process the Commission services have
informed the Portuguese authorities that a financial correction of 2 % of Ifadap expenditure is proposed
(EUR 2,8 million)’.