WRITTEN QUESTION E-2222/03 by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Europe-wide harmonisation of insurance against acts of terrorism.
Date: 2003-07-02
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Netherlands, State aid, competition law, control of State aid, insurance company, reinsurance, terrorism

13.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65 E/119

If that is not the case, will it, therefore, henceforth translate all press reports which are of relevance to all
European Union citizens into all the official languages of the European Union so that all European Union
citizens may receive information in their own language not only about the possible unfair pricing of
Pokemon stickers but also about other at least equally relevant European and social themes? If not, why
not?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(12 August 2003)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the answer it gave to the Honourable Member’s
Written Question E-1972/03 (1).

Press releases issued by the Spokesman Service of the Commission are of course available to citizens, other
institutions of the Union, businesses, governments and non-governmental organisations. However, press
releases are designed to facilitate a rapid flow of information to the public primarily through the media.
The practice applied by the Spokesman Service is, therefore, designed to facilitate the flow of information
towards the journalists. Given that the purpose of a press release is to inform different target audiences
through the media, the Spokesman Service of the Commission applies the system flexibly, taking into
account the need to put out press releases quickly.

Press releases referring to Commission decisions are translated into all official languages. In exceptional
circumstances, if the measure concerned has been adopted at a very short delay, a press release may be
released in either English or French only. In these cases translations into other languages are provided as
quickly as possible.

On other issues, press releases are translated into the languages used in the press room of the Commission
(English and French) plus the language of the country concerned.

These practices have the agreement of the International Press Association.

The Commission would also like to refer the Honourable Member to the other instruments that it uses to
provide information to the general public (Internet sites, publications, etc), which are available in all official
languages.

(1) OJ C 51 E, 26.2.2004, p. 169.

(2004/C 65 E/132)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2222/03

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(2 July 2003)

Subject: Europe-wide harmonisation of insurance against acts of terrorism

Since the terrorist attack in New York on 11 September 2001, it has become clear that terrorist acts may
have unprecedented consequences. First and foremost,
that affects the victims and their immediate
surroundings, but a great deal of economic damage may be caused as well. The cost of compensation for
the damage caused is borne principally by the insurance companies, and insurance claims for enormous
amounts may be submitted.

Insurance companies in the Netherlands have decided to bear jointly the risk of terrorist activities because
the impact thereof can be so great. To that end, the Netherlands Reinsurance Company for Losses from
Terrorism (NHT) has been set up as an umbrella organisation for insurance companies to provide cover for
the consequences of terrorism.

C 65 E/120

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

13.3.2004

In the Netherlands, the total sum that may be paid out for 2003 is being limited to EUR 1 billion.
According to the multilingual website www.terrorismeverzekerd.nl, that amount is a maximum total
amount, and no compensation will be paid in excess thereof. The amount has been put together by
reinsurance companies and the government. The insurance companies and
insurance companies,
reinsurance
remaining
the government’s contribution is being
EUR 300 million. According to www.terrorismeverzekerd.nl,
made in the form of government reinsurance of the insurance companies against payment of a premium.

in EUR 700 million,

companies have

the government

jointly put

the

The Belgian insurance sector is aware of this initiative. However, according to the 23 June 2003 edition of
‘De Morgen’, it takes the view that a European system of compensation for acts of terrorism would be the
best solution, since it would forestall any overbidding between the Member States. On the other hand, it
would be a mistake for Belgium to be left behind in splendid isolation.

Is the Commission aware of the Netherlands scheme for insurance against acts of terrorism? Does the
Netherlands Government’s contribution comply with European legislation on fair competition?

If so,

(1)

is there a maximum amount that Member State governments may contribute to such agreements with
private insurance companies;

(2)

is it true that Member States may outbid each other for the benefit of their own insurance sector;

(3)

is the Commission prepared to undertake Europe-wide harmonisation so as to ensure that (a) not only
insurance companies but also insured persons are covered on the same terms throughout
the
European Union and (b) employees and investors in the insurance sector are properly protected
against the unpredictable extent of the economic damage caused by terrorism?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(19 September 2003)

In reaction to the events of 11 September 2001 several pools of insurers have been set up in Europe each
of which concentrates on insuring risks which are located within a national territory. This could raise
issues of antitrust law and if there is state backing, also state aid law.

As regards the antitrust aspects, to the knowledge of the Commission the Netherlands pool has been
notified to the national Dutch competition authority. The German pool Extremus and the Austrian pool
notified their agreements to the Commission where they are currently under investigation.

The Commission is in close contact with the national authorities to ensure a common approach with
respect to the evaluation and treatment of such pools.

The Commission has also maintained close contacts with the national insurance authorities in order to
assess, among others, the situation on the markets and the need to launch an initiative at Union level in
the field of terrorist risks insurance. The very large majority of Member States have not considered it
necessary. The Commission will, however, remain vigilant as to any evolution in this file.

There is no maximum amount that Member State Governments may contribute to such pools. As a rule,
state backed pools cover only risks located within the national territory of the state backing the pool.
Therefore, these pools do not compete with each other.

If such schemes are state backed, they could also give rise to State aid concerns. The Commission has
examined under State aid rules a series of insurance schemes for terrorist acts in the aftermath of
the
in particular for aviation in nearly all Member States.
11 September 2001,

In its assessment,

13.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65 E/121

failure. The Commission has issued two
Commission has paid attention to presence of market
Communications (1) on the repercussions of these terrorist attacks and has proposed a Regulation (2) in
order to provide for minimum insurance requirements. The adoption of this proposal is still pending.

Outside the aviation sector, the Commission has not yet received any State aid notification for schemes of
the type mentioned by the Honourable Member.

(1) COM(2001) 574 final COM(2002) 320 final.
(2) COM(2003) 454 final.

(2004/C 65 E/133)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2232/03

by Sebastiano Musumeci (UEN) to the Council

(3 July 2003)

Subject: Euro-Mediterranean Bank in Sicily

At the request of the Laeken European Council of December 2001, the Commission and the Council have
examined the possibility of setting up a Euro-Mediterranean Bank. The Barcelona European Council of
15/16 March 2002 approved the creation of a reinforced Euro-Mediterranean investment facility within
the EIB, complemented by a Euro-Mediterranean partnership arrangement and an EIB representative office
in the area.

Could the Council therefore indicate:

1. what criteria will be adopted for selecting the country in which to base the Euro-Mediterranean

branch of the EIB;

2. whether it does not consider that Sicily might be the most appropriate region in which to site that
bank, given its geopolitical position in the Europe-Africa-Asia basin and its age-old historical, cultural
and religious tradition?

Reply

(17 November 2003)

As noted in the Member’s question, the European Council, in Barcelona on 15/16 March 2002, approved,
in paragraph 52 of its Conclusions, the Ecofin Council’s decision on the creation of a reinforced Euro-
Mediterranean investment facility within the EIB. This facility was established by the European Investment
Bank in accordance with the Council decision as the ‘Facility for Euro-Mediterranean Investment and
Partnership’ or ‘FEMIP’.

Taking into account all the elements cited by the Member in his question, the FEMIP was established with
a financial facility, complemented by the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership arrangement, which pursues
co-operation in the region through its ‘Policy Dialogue and Coordination Committee’, with co-operation
further enhanced by the establishment of a representative office of the EIB in the Euro-Mediterranean
region.

Such a regional office was opened in Cairo in July of 2003.

On the same occasion, the European Council Conclusions also noted in paragraph 52 that ‘On the basis of
an evaluation of the Facility’s performance, and taking into account the outcome of consultations with our
Barcelona Process partners, a decision on the incorporation of an EIB majority-owned subsidiary dedicated
to our Mediterranean partner countries will be considered and taken one year after the launching of the
Facility.’ As the FEMIP was launched in October 2002, the evaluation of its first year of operation is
expected to be completed in the Autumn of this year, with the associated decision on the incorporation of
a subsidiary to be taken in light of that evaluation.

The Council is expected to discuss the evaluation and the outcome of consultations with Barcelona Process
partners in November, at which point it may consider the question of the incorporation of an EIB
majority-owned subsidiary.