WRITTEN QUESTION E-3040/03 by Jo Leinen (PSE) to the Commission. Application of Directive 2000/35/EC (deadlines for payment) to payments in connection with projects covered by the European Development Fund.
Date: 2003-10-17
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Commission, European Development Fund, administration of the Institutions, deadline for payment, financial regulation, image

C 65 E/262

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

13.3.2004

in sufficiently precise and
in this area, not the least of which is the practical difficulty in defining,
watertight legal terms, the boundaries of the subject-matter to which different terms of protection might
be applied. Moreover, even if it should be concluded that it is desirable and feasible to make such a
change, for the reasons mentioned above, this would need to be pursued as a policy objective through
international negotiations.

(2004/C 65 E/276)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3040/03

by Jo Leinen (PSE) to the Commission

(17 October 2003)

Subject: Application of Directive 2000/35/EC (deadlines for payment) to payments in connection with

projects covered by the European Development Fund

Is it true that Directive 2000/35/EC (1), which was to be transposed by the Member States into national law
by 8 August 2002 and laid down a 30-day deadline for the payment of invoices, also applies to payment
transactions between EU authorities (such as the European Development Fund) and their contractual
partners?

In response to an inquiry, a member of the EDF administrative staff told us in March 2003 that she was
unaware of the Directive and that the EDF continued to apply a 90-day deadline to the settlement of its
accounts. What will the European Commission now do in order to avoid giving the impression that the
Union issues generally binding rules which their own bodies feel do not apply to them?

(1) OJ L 200, 8.8.2000, p. 35.

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(20 November 2003)

Directive 2000/35/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 29 June 2000 on combating late payment
in commercial transactions, does not harmonise the payment period at 30 days. The contracting parties
may define the payment period as they wish. Article 3(1) of the Directive stipulates that interest shall
become payable from the day following the date or the end of the period for payment fixed in the
contract. If the date or period for payment is not fixed in the contract, interest automatically becomes
payable 30 days following the date of receipt of the invoice or the date of receipt of the goods or services.

The Directive regulates all commercial transactions,
including those between undertakings and public
authorities, the latter as defined by the Public Procurement Directives (1) 92/50/EEC, 93/36/EEC, 93/37/EEC
and 93/38/EEC. The Commission has undertaken to apply the terms of Directive 2000/35/EC (2) to its own
contracting procedures, following the provisions set down in the Implementing Rules of the Financial
Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Community (3).

Article 106 of the Implementing Rules states that sums due shall be paid within no more than 45 calendar
days from the date on which an admissible payment request is registered by the authorised department of
the authorising officer responsible. The payment period shall be 30 calendar days for payments relating to
service or supply contracts, save where the contract provides otherwise.

However, the Implementing Rules apply only to the general budget. The European Development Fund
(EDF) is not included in the budget but organised and financed on an inter-governmental basis. It has its
own specific Financial Regulation adopted on 27 March 2003 and applicable to the 9th European
Development Fund (4). The EDF Financial Regulation has to respect the obligations of the Community
contained in the Partnership Agreement with the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) States signed on
23 June 2000 in Cotonou (Benin) (5).

13.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65 E/263

In Annex IV of the Agreement, Article 37 (6) lays down that the procedures for clearance, authorisation
and payment of expenditure must be completed within a period of 90 days from the date on which the
payment becomes due.

Under the Cotonou Agreement, financial management is decentralised to the authorities of the ACP
countries. Their National Authorising Officers (NAO) manage EDF programmes. Under the terms of
Article 37(6) mentioned above the NAO has 45 days to process and deliver the payment authorisation to
the Commission’s Head of Delegation responsible for the country concerned. The Commission then has,
within the overall 90-days limit, 45 days to complete its internal procedures and make the payment.

This rule contained in the Cotonou Agreement was taken over in Article 67 of the EDF Financial
Regulation.

(1) Council Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992 relating to the coordination of procedures for the award of public
service contracts, OJ L 209, 24.7.1992 Council Directive 93/36/EEC of 14 June 1993 coordinating procedures for
the award of public supply contracts, OJ L 199, 9.8.1993 Council Directive 93/37/EEC of 14 June 1993 concerning
the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, OJ L 199, 9.8.1993 Council Directive
93/38/EEC of 14 June 1993 coordinating the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy,
transport and telecommunications sectors, OJ L 199, 9.8.1993.

(2) Directive 2000/35/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 29 June 2000 on combating late payment in
commercial
transactions, OJ L 200, 8.8.2000, Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2342/2002 of
23 December 2002 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom)
No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities.

(3) OJ L 357, 31.12.2002.
(4) OJ L 83, 1.4.2003.
(5) OJ L 317, 15.12.2000.

(2004/C 65 E/277)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3041/03

by Stavros Xarchakos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(17 October 2003)

Subject: Serious defects in Greek ambulances

The ‘New Democracy’ party has repeatedly brought up in the Greek parliament the question of the
provision of ambulances belonging to the National Emergency Aid Centre (EKAB), the specifications which
should be met, transparency in the choice of the vehicle makes bought and the equipment that they
should have in order to be able to carry out their difficult tasks.

Workers at EKAB have on many occasions pointed out that many of these ambulances lack the requisite
portable artificial respiration equipment (which is designed to give the first supplies of oxygen to an
injured person), as well as another acutely essential piece of equipment, the defibrillator, which ought to be
in every ambulance to administer repeated electrical shocks to a patient who has had a heart attack.

The ‘New Democracy’ party has repeatedly pointed out (through the social issues coordinator responsible
for this area, our former European Parliament colleague Nikitas Kaklamanis) the problem of lack of
transparency in the choice of ambulances makes bought from time to time (thanks to the second and third
Community support frameworks).

Could the Commission set out the exact total amounts which have been made available by the EU from
1994 until the present, and indicate precisely which operational programmes (either via the CSF or
Community initiatives) apply to the provision of ambulances and other emergency medical care transport
units? Has the Commission been informed of the above-mentioned defects in ambulance equipment? What
is the Commission’s position with regard to the allegations by workers at EKAB that for a city such as
Athens (with five million residents) there are only 72 ambulances, amounting to one ambulance for every
70 000 city residents; hence the recent incident (on 30 September 2003) of the injured motorcyclist in
Athens who waited for two hours in a heap on the road for an ambulance to arrive?