WRITTEN QUESTION E-3089/03 by Bruno Gollnisch (NI) to the Council. Alstom.
Date: 2003-10-20
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European treaties, State aid, bankruptcy, energy production, labour market, regional economy, revision of an agreement

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/777

(2004/C 78 E/0826)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3089/03

by Bruno Gollnisch (NI) to the Council

(20 October 2003)

Subject: Alstom

Article 87 of the Treaty lays down the rules governing State aids and specifies which types may be
considered as compatible with the common market, e.g. aid to promote the economic development of
certain areas or activities, or to remedy a serious disturbance in the economy of a Member State, etc.

If Alstom, which employs tens of thousands of workers in Europe, were to go bakrupt, this would have a
devastating effect on employment and the economy of entire regions and would undoubtedly cause a
‘disturbance’. And yet the Commission has decided to be particularly strict on this issue.

It is not uncommon for states to support companies experiencing difficulties. In such cases, consideration
of the strategic nature of the industrial activity or the jobs situation should take precedence over a purely
financial or economic analysis of the measures since the aid is clearly of a temporary and non-structural
nature.

Does the Council consider that
the EU texts, which have remained virtually unchanged since the
beginning, are still appropriate for responding to the challenges of competition, which is now worldwide
and, in may cases, unfair?

Is it prepared, in particular, to remove references in the relevant articles of the Treaty to competition and
the operation of the common market and replace them with references to the need to preserve jobs and
fight for the survival of strategic sectors?

Reply

(4 March 2004)

The attention of the Honourable Member is drawn to the fact that it is not within the Council’s
competencies to revise the text of the Treaty establishing the European Community. Such a revision can
only take place within the framework of an intergovernmental conference and by subsequent ratification
by the Member States.

Furthermore, it is recalled that the European Parliament has taken an active part in the work carried out by
the European Convention, and has presumably been in a position to present views on the issue raised by
the Honourable Member in that framework.

(2004/C 78 E/0827)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3090/03

by Antonios Trakatellis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(14 October 2003)

Subject: Declassification of forest land and forests and redefinition of the term ‘forest’ under new legislation

proposed by the Greek Government.

Under the new forestry bill tabled by the Greek Government, around 3 million hectares of forest and forest
land will be declassified. The proposed legislation will also redefine the term ‘forests’ and reset the legal
limits for authorisation of land and clearance operations.

In view of this and the numerous grey areas existing under the proposed legislation:

1. To what extent does this proposed legislation comply with the directives on the preservation of

natural habitats (92/43/EEC (1)) and environmental impact assessment (85/337/EEC (2)).

2. How great

is the danger which could arise from declassifying forest areas for construction or
infrastructural development purposes, given that it could result in soil erosion and increase flood risks?