WRITTEN QUESTION P-4035/03 by Helena Torres Marques (PSE) to the Commission. Implementation in Portugal of the regulation on automobile distribution.
Date: 2004-01-05
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Portugal, consumer protection, distributive trades, motor car, motor vehicle industry, selling price

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/287

Africa. However, in absolute terms this is less than previously because the total allocated to the region
under the ninth EDF is lower and because the Republic of Congo is now part of the regions of East Africa
(Comesa (1) IGAD (2), COI (3), EAC (4)) and Southern Africa (SADC (5)). But the various NIPs will also be
contributing, namely EUR 3,3 million to Gabon, EUR 4 million to Cameroon and EUR 2 million to the
Republic of Congo (cid:1) although the latter has yet to be confirmed. Then, given the importance of the
Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) for the forests of the Congo river basin, it cannot be left out of any
regional programme, and this means contributing to the regional funds for which the DRC is eligible.
The DRC requested support totalling some EUR 10 million from the Regional Indicative Programmes
(RIPs)
for East Africa agreed to provide
EUR 5 million on condition that SADC did the same, the SADC regional body has so far refused, which
means that the DRC cannot participate in the regional programme. The DRC has therefore resubmitted its
application to SADC and a SADC Council decision is expected early in March. If this Council hands down
a favourable decision, the global amounts allocated to further work on the conservation of Central African
forest ecosystems will be roughly the same as those granted for earlier phases of the programme and will
enable the DRC to rejoin the local actions and partnership processes inherent in the political initiative that
is the Congo Basin Forest Partnership.

for East Africa and Southern Africa. Whilst

the IRCC (6)

(1) Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa.
(2)
Intergovernmental Authority on Development.
(3)
Indian Ocean Commission.
(4) East African Community.
(5) Southern Africa Development Community.
(6)
Inter Regional Co-ordinating Committee.

(2004/C 84 E/0333)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-4035/03

by Helena Torres Marques (PSE) to the Commission

(5 January 2004)

Subject: Implementation in Portugal of the regulation on automobile distribution

At a meeting held on 9 December 2003 in Brussels by the Association of European Automobile
1.
Constructors, the chairman of that association (Mr Louis Schweitz, chairman and CEO of Renault) said
that, in the wake of the new regulation on automobile distribution, manufacturers would harmonise the
basic prices of motorcars sold in the various EU countries.

It was pointed out to Mr Schweitz (who agreed) that this would lead to an increase in the price of

2.
motorcars sold in Portugal.

Since the purpose of the new regulation on automobile distribution is the precise opposite (i.e. to
3.
bring about a reduction in the consumer price of motorcars, to increase the volume of sales and to cause
old cars to be replaced by newer models, with all the implications which that would entail in terms of
vehicle safety and a healthier environment), would the Commission give its views on this matter, which is
naturally causing the greatest concern amongst consumers and Portuguese automobile distributors?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(5 February 2004)

The Commission’s policy on competition in the motor vehicle sector has always been that motor vehicle
distributors, whether or not they are based in the same EU Member State, should be subject to free
competition. This approach, which is enshrined in the new block exemption regulation (1) which entered
into force on 1 October 2002, helps to create a single market in the motor vehicle sector and enables
today’s European consumers to take advantage of the best prices in the EU. For some manufacturers, this
process of integration of national markets is reflected in a policy of convergence of basic tax exclusive
prices for vehicles of the same make and model throughout the European Union.

C 84 E/288

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

As regards the point made by the Honourable Member concerning the increase in the basic price of cars in
Portugal, the Commission would point out that a pricing policy determined on an independent basis by a
motor vehicle manufacturer is strictly the business of that manufacturer. The Commission has no mandate
to intervene in respect of manufacturers’ business decisions.

However, price increases decided by joint agreement between a manufacturer and its independent dealers,
or between competing manufacturers, are generally prohibited under European competition law.
If
evidence were found of concerted price increases the Commission would not hesitate to take action in
accordance with its role as guardian of fair competition in the internal market.

To date, however, no information of concerted price increases on the Portuguese market has come to light.

(1) Commission Regulation (EC) No 1400/2002 of 31 July 2002 on the application of Article 81(3) of the Treaty to

categories of vertical agreements and concerted practices in the motor vehicle sector, OJ L 203, 1.8.2002.

(2004/C 84 E/0334)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4045/03

by Joan Colom i Naval (PSE) to the Commission

(12 January 2004)

Subject: Contamination of groundwater in Catalonia

According to the 2003 risk report produced by the foundation ‘Instituto de Estudios de Seguridad’, a third
of all Catalan municipalities (306 out of 946) experience a high level of groundwater contamination owing
to nitrates originating from excess slurry.

On 1 October 1998, Spain was found guilty by the Court of Justice, in Case C-71/97, of failing to comply
with Directive 91/676/EEC (1). The Court of Justice subsequently found Spain guilty,
in its ruling of
13 April 2000 on Case C-274/98, of failing to comply with Article 5 of Directive 91/676/EEC.

Can the Commission indicate what
types of control procedure have been followed to verify the
implementation of the directive in question? How does the Commission explain the fact that the number
of communities affected by nitrate contamination of groundwater has increased by over 50 %? What
measures will
the Commission take to solve this problem, which affects a third of all Catalan
municipalities, without endangering their populations? Does it consider these circumstances to square
with transferring water from the Ebro to other parts of Spain?

(1) OJ L 375, 31.12.1991, p. 1.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(24 February 2004)

Pursuant to the judgements of the European Court of Justice in cases C-71/97 and C-274/98, Spain has
adopted different measures to ensure compliance with the provisions of Council Directive 91/676/EEC of
12 December 1991 concerning the protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from
agricultural sources, hereafter ‘Nitrates Directive’. Nonetheless, the Commission, in exercising its controlling
powers, has subsequently observed that these measures might be insufficient.

Regarding the situation in Catalonia, it should be noted that the Spanish authorities designated six Nitrate
Vulnerable Zones (NVZs) in 1998 (1) within this Autonomous Community. According to the Commission
Assessment, further designations were required in Catalonia.

The proper designation of NVZs represents the first step to controlling nitrate pollution. Appropriate
action programmes should be established in NVZs, ensuring the implementation of a comprehensive set of
measures for fertilisation, soil management, livestock manure management and the compulsory application
of the Code of Agricultural Practice.