WRITTEN QUESTION P-1705/03 by Gabriele Stauner (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Investigations into Planistat Europe SA.
Date: 2003-05-16
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Anti-fraud Office, European Commission, Eurostat, contract, economic offence, fraud against the EU, payment, services company, trade relations

C 70 E/56

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

20.3.2004

Reply

(8 December 2003)

Poverty reduction is the overarching goal of EC’s development policy. At its November 2002 meeting,
the Council (GAERC) adopted its conclusions on Trade and Development, where it recognised that trade
liberalisation in itself is not sufficient to combat poverty in developing countries and it stressed the need
for balanced trade rules that benefit all countries, with particular attention to the least developed countries.

The Council
is both aware and deeply concerned about the long-term decline of the prices of most
commodities and is taking care of this issue in the context of a joint reflection with the Commission on
the basis of a recent Commission paper on Agriculture Commodity Trade, Dependence and Poverty which
deals inter alia with the potential of mainstreaming fair trade.

The Council welcomes fair trade insofar as it gives producers in developing countries higher revenues for
their goods as well as increased opportunities to find new markets. In so doing, fair trade aims to
contribute to establishing the conditions that can foster a higher level of social and environmental
protection in developing countries.

Currently, the only fair trade products that have 4 % or more of the market within the EC are bananas in
the Netherlands (4,2 %) and Luxembourg (4 %). Fair trade coffee consumption is increasing but still remains
very limited. Total turnover for all fair trade goods in Europe is estimated to be around EUR 260 million.
Fair trade products are typically 5 % to10 % more expensive than equivalent conventional products. In
addition, the movement is a largely European phenomenon. In the US it is virtually unknown (cid:1) e.g. fair
trade coffee accounts for only 0,15 % of their market.

Thus the potential for expansion globally exists, but closing the gap between the intentions of the
consumers and their actual behaviour is likely to require time and would have to pass through a wider
presence and recognition of these products by the consumers. European Fair Trade Week should therefore
be actively supported.

The Council considers that promoting the demand for fair-trade products is part of a wider scenario of
corporate social responsibility. At the ICO/World Bank Round Table on the Coffee Crisis held in London
on 19 May 2003, the EC suggested inter alia encouraging private industry to invest in long-term relations
with suppliers, based on mutual benefit, through the introduction of codes of conduct for the purchase of
coffee, in which fair prices should be one of the essential elements.

Finally, the Council has welcomed the Commission’s intention to present a general review of the EU’s
trade-related assistance in 2005. This review should be an appropriate occasion to consider possible ways
to foster the consumption of fair-trade products.

(2004/C 70 E/059)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1705/03

by Gabriele Stauner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(16 May 2003)

Subject: Investigations into Planistat Europe SA

On 19 March 2003, the European Anti-Fraud Office. OLAF, filed charges against Planistat Europe SA with
the Paris Public Prosecutor. The company was accused of being involved in fraudulent activities which
adversely affected the Community budget.

20.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 70 E/57

OLAF’s charge is manifestly based on a report by the Internal Audit Unit of the Statistical Office, Eurostat,
which was drawn up as long ago as September 1999. The report claimed that Planistat Europe SA had
issued large numbers of bogus invoices and had been involved in the creation of slush funds on which
Eurostat officials were subsequently able to draw.

Despite these accusations, the Commission failed to terminate its business relations with Planistat Europe
SA. The Commission’s answer to my Written Question E-1283/02 states that the company received
EUR 670 195 from the Community budget in 2000 and EUR 1 607 118 from the 2001 budget.

Can the Commission explain why Eurostat’s business relations with Planistat Europe SA were not
terminated?

Can it explain why Commissioner Schreyer did not herself
intervene in order to stop any further
payments, once the audit referred to above had been submitted to the Directorate-General for Financial
Control, which operates under her authority, in spring 2000?

Can the Commission indicate the total amount of payments received by Planistat Europe SA from Eurostat
over the last ten years, as well as the additional amount paid out of the slush funds referred to above?

Can the Commission also indicate the scale of payments received by Planistat Europe SA from other
Commission departments?

(2004/C 70 E/060)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1807/03

by Herbert Bösch (PSE) to the Commission

(23 May 2003)

Subject: Commercial relations between the Commission and the Planistat Group

On 19 March 2003 the European Anti-Fraud Office OLAF laid a charge against Planistat Europe SA before
the Paris public prosecutor. The company is accused of being involved in fraudulent practices and, by
means of fictitious accounts practices, of having helped set up illicit accounts, which were then able to be
used by Eurostat officials.

The Commission’s Directorate-General for Financial Control has apparently been aware of this state of
affairs since spring 2000.

Could the Commission indicate why commercial relations with companies in the Planistat Group were not,
however, broken off and new contracts were even awarded?

On its Internet site the Planistat Group states that it has a turnover of millions in its work for the
Commission, and that it works for the following Commission Directorates-General and services:

(cid:1) External relations DG;

(cid:1) Entreprise DG;

(cid:1) Development DG;

(cid:1) Research DG;

(cid:1) Energy and Transport DG;

(cid:1) Trade DG;

(cid:1) Delegations;

(cid:1) Forward Studies Unit;

(cid:1) SCR (Joint External Relations Service);

(cid:1) TACIS (EU Technical Assistance to the Commonwealth of Independent States);

(cid:1) Industry DG;