WRITTEN QUESTION E-3461/03 by Peder Wachtmeister (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Corruption scandal within the Swedish retail monopoly undertaking Systembolaget AB.
Date: 2003-11-21
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Sweden, alcohol, competition law, corruption, exclusive distribution agreement, monopoly, retail selling

C 78 E/288

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

The Commission has promoted the conservation and sustainable management of forests through
3.
development co-operation programmes for a number of years, including projects in the countries and
regions mentioned by the Honourable Member. It has, since 1992, managed a budget line specifically
aimed at tropical forests and forests in developing countries. The Commission also participates together
with Member States in global processes aimed at promoting sustainable forest management such as the
United Nations (UN) Forum on Forests and the International Tropical Timber Organisation.

4.
The Commission considers that the estimate of the proportion of tropical hardwood entering the
Union market without an eco-label may well be correct. There is, however, no statutory ban on the
importation of tropical hardwood (with or without ecolabel) as the question suggests, other than the
current ban on the importation of Liberian timber resulting from UN Security Council Resolution 1478/
2003.

The Community market has not been closed to tropical hardwoods without an eco-label for various

5.
reasons, amongst them:

(cid:1) there has been no global

intergovernmental agreement on the definition of sustainable forest

management (cid:1) so the technical basis for such a ban would be disputed;

(cid:1) the Commission considers existing ecolabel schemes used to identify forest produce from sustainably
as voluntary market-based instruments which provide

certification)

managed forests
information to the consumer, not as a basis for trade bans;

(forest

(cid:1) tropical countries argue that the complexity of natural tropical forests makes it more difficult to certify
such forests compared to temperate forests with a limited number of species (cid:1) hence such a ban
could be considered discriminatory from this perspective;

(cid:1) a ban which only applied to tropical hardwoods would be discriminatory (cid:1) for it not to be so, it
would need to be applied to imports from all countries ie. including temperate and boreal countries.

6.
The Commission does not intend to take measures to prevent imports into the Union of tropical
hardwoods with no eco-label. Its approach is rather to encourage demand for forest products labelled as
being from sustainably managed forests through a voluntary approach, as stated in the Sixth Environment
Action Programme (1). The Commission has, however, proposed measures which would enable the
elimination of illegally harvested timber from the Union market in its Communication on Forest Law
Enforcement Governance and Trade (2).

(1) Decision No 1600/2002/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 22 July 2002, OJ L 242, 10.9.2002.
(2) COM(2003) 251 final.

(2004/C 78 E/0288)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3461/03

by Peder Wachtmeister (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(21 November 2003)

Subject: Corruption scandal within the Swedish retail monopoly undertaking Systembolaget AB

During the negotiations before Sweden’s accession to the European Union, the Commission permitted
Sweden to retain its State monopoly on the sale of alcohol, while stressing that all discrimination between
national goods and goods imported from other EU Member States must be eliminated.

At present a corruption scandal
is being exposed within the Swedish retail monopoly undertaking
Systembolaget AB. 35 managers have been given notice that they are under suspicion of involvement in
serious corruption. Three suppliers are the subject of a criminal investigation, one of them on suspicion of
bribery. It is thought that over a long period certain suppliers have received preferential treatment in
return for trips and gifts.

Will the Commission, in response to this, review Sweden’s retail monopoly, and will the exclusive rights to
the retail sale of alcohol in Sweden be questioned?

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/289

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(8 January 2004)

it agreed with the Commission that its competition
When Sweden became a member of the Union,
authority (Konkurrensverket) would see to it that Systembolaget would operate its retail monopoly in a
non-discriminatory way.

This monitoring arrangement remains valid today. However, the Commission will continue to keep close
and constant liaison with the Swedish authority in order to satisfy itself that no discrimination in violation
of the EC Treaty will occur.

(2004/C 78 E/0289)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3469/03

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE), Phillip Whitehead (PSE),
Catherine Stihler (PSE) and Margrietus van den Berg (PSE) to the Commission

Subject: Post-polio syndrome

(21 November 2003)

During two meetings of the Council of the European Union, the 2384th (Health, 15.11.2001, Brussels)
and the 2470th (Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Affairs, 2-3.12.2002), the Council took
note of statements made by the Belgian Presidency and the Irish delegation on the need for action at EU
level to provide an adequate response to sufferers of post-polio syndrome (PPS).

Can the Commission comment on the kind of action which has already been taken on this matter, more
specifically, on the level of:

1.

2.

information about the incidence of PPS within the EU, its onset, and availability of current research;

treatment available in the Member States for PPS sufferers to rehabilitate them and remedy their
condition.

3. What funds for research and treatment have been made available from the Community budget?

In the absence of any such action hitherto, what is the justification for this lack of follow-up?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(22 December 2003)

Information on incidence of post-polio syndrome, treatments and patient groups is available through
1.
projects supported under the Community public health programmes. The Parliament and Council adopted
a Programme of Community Action for rare diseases on 29 April 1999 (1). Twenty-four 24 projects have
been conducted under this former programme. These can be found at the Europa Website:
(http://
europa.eu.int/comm/health/ph_projects/rarediseases_project_en.htm).

Decision No 1786/2002/EC of the Parliament and Council of 23 September 2002 adopting a programme
of Community action in the field of public health (2003-2008) (2) includes addressing rare diseases as an
important objective. Rare diseases are defined as of genetic origin,
life-threatening or of a chronically
debilitating nature which are of such low prevalence that special combined efforts are needed to address
them. As a guide, low prevalence is taken as prevalence of less than 5 per 10 000 in the Community.

As regards rare disease projects, that programme prioritises actions of a generalist nature that result in the
centralisation of information on many rare diseases and not just on a specific group of diseases or single
diseases.