WRITTEN QUESTION P-3909/03 by Francesco Fiori (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Framework directive.
Date: 2003-12-10
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Commission, application of EU law, approximation of laws, division of powers, powers of the institutions (EU), single market, transmission network

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/115

over the course of 2004. One should also bear in mind the sizable differences experienced between actual
and perceived inflation in several Member States after the euro cash changeover when addressing the issue
of inflation and possible effects from this changeover.

The Commission, within the terms indicated in the EC Treaty (Article 153), contributes to protecting
3.
the economic interests of consumers and to promoting the effective enforcement of consumer protection
rules. However, the measures undertaken with these aims, though they may have an impact on the prices
of goods and services, cannot be considered from the point of view of the maintaining of price stability,
which is a task of the ECB, as mentioned above.

Referring directly to the introduction of the euro notes and coins, the Commission promoted a number of
initiatives aimed at preparing consumers to better manage the changeover to the new currency. Special
attention was paid to disfavoured people (the elderly, the disabled, people living in peripheral regions, etc.).
Within the programme ‘Euro Made Easy’, specific schemes were funded with a view to assisting public
authorities and consumer associations to anticipate possible problems linked with the introduction of the
new notes and coins. These initiatives were helpful for the success of the changeover to the new currency.

Both the Commission and the ECB review the current state of the euro area economy on a
4.
permanent basis. In addition to standard surveys of the real and nominal aspects of the economy, these
also include more in-depth studies on ad-hoc topics to highlight current fields of special interest, such as
euro area inflation and inflation perceptions.

5.
The latest Eurobarometer survey (published on 15 December 2003) indicates that only a minority
(31 %) of euro area citizens is in favour of a EUR 1 banknote. Support for such a banknote mainly
originates from two Member States, where a majority (70 % in Greece, 76 % in Italy), would welcome the
introduction of a EUR 1 banknote. However, in the 10 other euro-area Member States, there is a clear
majority (exceeding 60 % in all cases and even reaching almost 90 % in a number of Member States)
against the introduction of such an additional banknote.

In accordance with the EC Treaty, any decision on banknote denominations would have to be taken
6.
by the European Central Bank (ECB) which has the exclusive right to authorise the issue of euro banknotes.
The ECB has decided to reconsider the issuance of very low-denomination banknotes in autumn 2004
when more experience on the use of euro banknotes and coins inside and also outside the euro area is
available. If a very low-denomination banknote were to be issued, it would be part of the second series of
euro banknotes, to be introduced towards the end of this decade.

(2004/C 84 E/0151)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3909/03

by Francesco Fiori (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(10 December 2003)

Subject: Framework directive

In the light of Article 7 and recitals 36 and 37 of the framework directive (2002/21/EC (1)), what action has
been taken to guarantee that the activities of such bodies are transparent for the purposes of interaction
with industry and clearly defining who is responsible for harmonisation?

The new framework gives the ERG a purely consultative role, while the crucial role of ensuring that the
framework is implemented in a consistent manner should be retained by the Commission, on the basis of
the powers conferred on it by the Treaty. What is the Commission doing within the ERG framework to
make sure that it retains its proper role of ensuring that the new framework is applied in a consistent
manner, in accordance with the objectives laid down by Community law?

(1) OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 33.

C 84 E/116

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(28 January 2004)

Article 7 of Directive 2002/21/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on a common
regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services (the Framework Directive) is
addressed to national regulatory authorities of the Member States in the discharge of their duties for ex ante
regulation under the regulatory framework for electronic communications. Under the terms of Article 7,
national regulators must cooperate with each other ‘in a transparent manner to ensure the consistent
application, in all Member States’ of the provisions of the new framework. As the Honourable Member has
noted, the terms of the legislative provisions in question require transparency from Community regulators.

In addition, as regards interaction with industry, the procedures laid down in the Framework Directive
clearly provide for the involvement of interested parties in the proposed measures to be adopted by such
national regulators. Prior to taking any action that will have a significant impact on the relevant market,
for example, to designate an undertaking as having significant market power, an NRA must conduct a
public consultation for a reasonable period as laid down in Article 6 of the Framework Directive. During
this period, industry and other interested parties are able to comment upon the measure. Member States
are required to establish a single information point so that all active consultations can easily be accessed by
third parties.

As foreseen in recitals 36 and 37, the Commission has created the European Regulators Group (ERG)
which brings together the national regulatory authorities of the Member States. The ERG is a tool to
contribute to a coherent and harmonised application of the Community acquis. In this regard, it must also
be recognised that the members of the ERG are independent regulators in their own right and are charged
with the day-to-day application of the new regulatory framework, to the extent that they are empowered
to act under national law implementing Community law.

Under Article 211 of the Treaty on European Union and of the EC Treaty, the Commission is obliged to
ensure that the provisions of the Treaties and the measures taken by the institutions pursuant to them
[i.e. any directives adopted] are applied. The Commission’s role in relation to Community law is therefore
to oversee the correct application of the rules but not to substitute for the NRAs themselves.

The European Regulators Group is part of the institutional infrastructure foreseen by the new electronic
communications regulatory framework to ensure that the relevant regulatory rules are consistently applied
in all Member States. It was created by the Commission to advise and assist it by, ‘inter alia’, providing an
interface between national authorities and the Commission so as to contribute to the development of the
internal market, which is one of the principal objectives of the EC Treaty, and to facilitate co-operation
between the Commission and NRAs in a transparent way to achieve consistency of application of the
regulatory framework. The ERG serves as a body for ‘reflection, debate and advice’
in the electronic
communications field (1). It is therefore clear that the ERG is an advisory group to the Commission and not
an implementation body in its own right. Its primary roles are to advise the Commission and to assist in
the consistent application of the regulatory framework. This means that the ERG actively contributes to the
preparation of supplementary measures, such as recommendations, under the new regulatory framework
by providing expert advice to the Commission, but responsibility for implementation of Community law
remains a Commission task under the EC Treaty.

The possibility for the ERG to carry out activities in its own name, such as publication of consultation
documents and a work programme, in no way calls into question the respective allocation of tasks and the
institutional balance at stake. These latter activities are simply a result of the ERG fulfilling the task it was
created for. The ERG was established under a Commission Decision and acts within the scope of that
Decision.

The creation of the ERG does not call into question Commission control and supervision of the application
of the new regulatory framework, nor the Commission’s right of initiative under the EC Treaty.

The Commission’s powers and duties under Community law stem from the provisions of the EC Treaty
that oblige it to ensure that Community law is applied and enforced correctly. Working with the ERG does
not involve any delegation to the ERG of Commission Treaty powers for enforcement and supervision of
Community law. The Commission therefore considers that its role as guardian of Community law will not
be jeopardised by the work of the ERG and the Commission’s participation in it. Furthermore, the

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/117

Commission will fulfil its role of ensuring that Community law, and the new framework in particular,
is applied in a consistent manner, in accordance with the objectives laid down by Community law itself.

(1) Commission Decision 2002/627/EC of 29 July 2002 establishing the European Regulators Group for Electronic

Communications Networks and Services, Recital 7, OJ L 200, 30.7.2002.

(2004/C 84 E/0152)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3912/03

by Ole Krarup (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(17 December 2003)

Subject: Oil extraction in the North Sea

Can the Commission state, as regards the Danish government’s agreement with A.P. Møller and the Dansk
Undergrund Consortium on the conditions for oil extraction over the next 40 years in the North Sea,
whether the clause in the agreement protecting the concession holders from additional taxation, has been
notified as a state aid in accordance with Article 88(3) of the Treaty? If the agreement has not been
notified, can the Commission state whether agreements between governments and private concession
holders which grant the latter tax relief for a long period in the future should be regarded as state aids?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(17 February 2004)

The Commission would point out that it was not given prior notification of the agreement to which the
Honourable Member refers under Article 88(3) of the EC Treaty. However, the Danish authorities have sent
the detailed documents on the agreement. These documents are currently under study, and the
Commission cannot at this stage give a decision as to the type of measure.

The Commission would recall that as a general rule tax relief confined to certain activities or certain firms
could constitute state aid.

(2004/C 84 E/0153)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3928/03

by Stavros Xarchakos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(19 December 2003)

Subject: Forests and building cooperatives in Greece

In her answer to my question E-3196/03, Commissioner Wallström states that ‘the Commission is not
aware of statistics or information on unauthorised building in different Member States,
thus the
Commission can not assess the scale of unauthorised building in Greece.’ She goes on to state that ‘the
the standards of
received information from the Greek authorities about
Commission has never
workmanship of unauthorised buildings in Greece.’ In the same answer she states:
‘The Regulation on
’Forest Focus‘, that has recently been approved,
includes a definition of’forest‘and’other wooded land‘,
applicable to the actions that the Regulation will support.’ Finally she points out that: ‘The issue of the
members of building co-operatives who have not yet received land although paying contributions to the
building co-operative is a matter for national authorities and as such is regulated by national laws.’

I regret to note that the answer provided by the (very active) Commissioner is unsatisfactory, since a report
specifically on unauthorised buildings was published in the Greek press on 5 December 2003, stating that
the shoddy workmanship of such buildings ‘will fill Athens with coffins in the event of an earthquake