WRITTEN QUESTION P-3930/03 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Retention of privileges by the Agricultural Bank of Greece.
Date: 2003-12-16
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Greece, State aid, agricultural bank, application of EU law, competition law, consumer protection, financial legislation, right of action

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/511

As regards the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), cofunding for Alcatel was limited to aid
intended for modernising Battipaglia. This aid amounts to EUR 3 034 million for the 1994-1999
programming period and to EUR 1 835 million for the period 2000-2006. Aid for the Maddaloni,
Frosinone and Reti plants was not cofinanced by the ERDF.

The Commission is not in a position to provide information concerning the Alcatel investment plan to
step up productivity and increase employment according to Law 488.

According to information from Alcatel, A. Italia has withdrawn the last two L488 applications, decreed in
2001:

(cid:1) 51437/11 (Maddaloni extension);

(cid:1) 19328/11 (Battipaglia extension).

The investment foreseen in the applications has been carried out, but due to adverse market conditions, it
was not possible to fulfil the planned increase in employment. For this reason the two applications have
been withdrawn and no funding has been granted to Alcatel Italia.

The four Structural Funds allow the European Union to grant financial assistance to resolve structural,
economic and social problems. As a general rule, the Structural Funds (ERDF, ESF) finance development
programmes which have been allocated an individual budget. These programmes are the product of joint
negotiations between the national, regional and local authorities (they establish a list of eligible areas), the
economic and social partners and other relevant bodies. The managing authorities appointed by the
Member States will select the projects to be financed and supervise their implementation.

The website of the Directorate-General for Regional Policy (Regio) contains summaries of most of the
programmes that have been officially adopted by the Commission (1).

(1) http://europa.eu.int/comm/regional_policy/country/prordn/

index_en.cfm?gv_pay=IT&gv_reg=ALL&gv_obj=1&gv_the=ALL

(2004/C 84 E/0589)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3930/03

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(16 December 2003)

Subject: Retention of privileges by the Agricultural Bank of Greece

Under Article 26(4) of N 1914/1990, ‘all the special arrangements which apply to the Agricultural Bank of
Greece, with particular reference to its substantive and procedural privileges, to its immunities in respect of
tax and other matters, to its debt instruments, to the guaranteeing of its debts and in general to its legal
personality as an entity possessing rights and subject to obligations’ remain in force and are applied
unchanged even following the conversion of the Agricultural Bank of Greece (ATE) into a limited liability
company. On the basis of this provision the ATE, in its transactions with its customers, makes use of the
privileges granted to it by Articles 8-15 and 34(8) of N 4332/1929, under which the legal, procedural and
substantive guarantees for those dealing with the ATE, and in particular its debtors, are set aside. The
Commission has also received a complaint on this subject from the firm Tipopiitiria Thivas A.E. (reply
from the Agriculture Directorate-General No 31427/24.11.2003).

Since the retention and application by the ATE of the above-mentioned privileges, which is contrary to
Community law, is onerous for those doing business with it and deprives them of all rights of defence,
what does the Commission intend to do to put a stop to the violation of the rights of those dealing with
the ATE and to eliminate the distortion of competition conditions with respect to other credit institutions?

C 84 E/512

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

Supplementary answer
given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(7 April 2004)

In 1997 and in 2001, the Commission received two complaints concerning the legislative privileges
benefiting the Agricultural Bank of Greece. The complainants criticized these privileges considering that
they amount to the grant of illegal State aids.

According to a constant case-law, ‘only advantages granted directly or indirectly through State resources
are aids within the meaning of the Treaty’ (see case C-379/98, Preussenelektra, ECR (2001) p. I-2099, §58).
To the extent that the legislative privileges benefiting to the Agricultural Bank of Greece do not affect
public resources, the Commission considered that they are not State aids within the meaning of the EC
treaty. Nevertheless, the Commission considered that Article 87 §1 of the EC Treaty could apply to fiscal
advantages in favour of the Bank. Accordingly, it opened an enquiry which revealed several tax advantages.

The discussions between the Commission and the Greek authorities lead to the abolition of
these
advantages, as confirmed by letter dated 24 February 2004, referring to the adoption of the requested
amendments (Greek Official Journal of the 10th February 2004, Law 3229 (cid:1) FEK 38/A/10.2.2004).

The information provided by the Honourable Member and received through the complaint of 2003 refers
to further privileges, but does not point to a clear infringement of the banking Directive (Directive 2000/
12/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 20 March 2000, on the taking up and pursuit of the activity
of credit institutions (1)) or of the EC Treaty.

However, the Commission services instructing the file will ask for clarifications from the Greek authorities
on the national provisions stipulating privileges of the Agricultural Bank of Greece.

(1) OJ L 126, 26.5.2000.

(2004/C 84 E/0590)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3955/03

by Heide Rühle (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

Subject: Interpretation of environmental information directives

(5 January 2004)

The concept ‘internal communications’ used in Article 3(4) and Article 4(1)(e) respectively of Directives 90/
313/EEC (1) and 2003/4/EC (2) concerning public access to environmental
information causes serious
interpretation problems when the attempt is made to apply it in practice.

Does the Commission consider that any simple process by which data and factual information are
1.
exchanged between or within authorities constitutes ‘internal communications’ for the purposes of the
directives?

If not,

in the light of what substantive or formal criteria ought

2.
information processes which
constitute ‘internal communications’ as referred to in the above directives to be distinguished from those
which are not excepted on the grounds of constituting ‘internal communications’?

(1) OJ L 158, 23.6.1990, p. 56.
(2) OJ L 41, 14.2.2003, p. 26.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(4 March 2004)

The Commission would like to remind the Honourable Member that Council Directive 90/313/EEC of
7 June 1990 on the freedom of access to information on the environment and Directive 2003/4/EC of the
Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2003 on public access to environmental information and