WRITTEN QUESTION P-0323/04 by Werner Langen (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Stage reached in examining the territorial monopoly of German chimney-sweeps.
Date: 2004-02-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Germany, application of EU law, free movement of workers, freedom to provide services, monopoly, right of establishment, service industry

C 84 E/572

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

The assessment of applications involves internal consultations following one on another. Translations have
to be made and the legal and technical aspects are complex. It is not suitable work for ‘stagiaires’.

We are aware that the amount of time taken to process applications annoys applicants and are considering
what can be done to speed things up in future.

The registration application for Sant’ Andrea Piemonte was received by the Agriculture Directorate-General
on 27 May last year. Given the complexity of the questions that have to be dealt with when an application
is assessed, it cannot reasonably be considered that the processing time in this case is already excessive.

DG AGRI is in ongoing contact with the Ministry for Agricultural and Forestry Policies in Italy, the
Commission’s official interlocutor on these matters. The reasons why applications at present take such a
long time to be processed are not unknown to the Ministry. The rules allocate responsibilities between the
Commission and Member States in such a way that the Commission is not empowered to enter into direct
contact with the group making the application or any other person with a direct interest.

(2004/C 84 E/0649)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0323/04

by Werner Langen (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(3 February 2004)

Subject: Stage reached in examining the territorial monopoly of German chimney-sweeps

According to a review carried out by the Directorate-General for Competition the territorial monopoly
enjoyed by German chimney-sweeps does not contravene European competition law. Nevertheless, the
Directorate-General for the Internal Market has launched investigations in the context of proceedings for
infringement of the Treaties. According to information received by the questioner the relevant hearings are
now being scheduled.

Can the Commission say:

1. whether the monopoly enjoyed by chimney-sweeps in the Federal Republic of Germany is a breach of

the freedom of establishment and freedom to provide services laid down in European law;

2. what stage has now been reached in the review procedure and/or Treaty infringement proceedings;

3. when a definitive decision can be expected and in what direction the deliberations of the Directorate-

General for the Internal Market in this area are pointing?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(2 March 2004)

The Commission considers that,

in particular, the district monopoly granted to master chimney-
1.
sweeps, together with various related provisions, infringes the right of establishment pursuant to Article 43
EC and the right to provide services pursuant to Article 49 EC,
insofar as this arrangement makes it
impossible for German citizens to avail themselves of the services of chimneys-sweeps established in other
Member States and prevents chimney-sweeps or heating specialists in other Member States from offering
their services in Germany.

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/573

Infringement proceedings were initiated by the transmission of a letter of formal notice to Germany
2.
in 2003. The German authorities immediately informed the Commission of their readiness to regularise
the situation from the standpoint of EU law. According to the latest available information, the Federal
Government and the Länder are discussing the revision of the legislation in question with a view to
presenting specific proposals in early summer 2004.

3.
The Commission intends to keep up its contacts with the German authorities and press for a
reformulation of the legislation in line with EU law. If this approach fails to produce satisfactory results,
the Commission will consider further action under the infringement procedure. This could involve the
adoption of a reasoned opinion followed, if appropriate, by a referral to the Court of Justice.

(2004/C 84 E/0650)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0327/04

by Dana Scallon (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(10 February 2004)

Subject: County Clare and Objective I of the Structural Fund

I understand from the Commission’s previous correspondence that County Clare will remain eligible for
Objective 1 in transition until 2006.

However, County Clare will become part of the new North-West constituency (formerly known as
Connacht Ulster)in 2004. At that time, can the Commission confirm that the existing Connacht Ulster
counties will maintain their Objective 1 status, but County Clare will not share this status?

Does the Commission not anticipate difficulty in this situation whereby it will be the only county in the
North-West constituency not enjoying Objective 1 status, even though this county shares the same
difficulties and needs as the counties of Connacht Ulster?

Can the Commission confirm whether County Clare will continue to have a different status from the other
counties of North-West after 2006?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(29 March 2004)

The process for determining eligibility for Objective 1 support for the 2000-2006 period is set out in
Article 3, paragraph 1 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general
provisions on the Structural Funds (1). The rules mean that, once estabilished, the list of eligible regions
remains in force for the entire programming period, 2000-2006.

As the Commission indicated in response to Written Question E-3699/03 (2), the eligibility of County Clare
for Objective 1 in transition will not be affected by its inclusion in the North-West constituency for the
purpose of elections to the Parliament. The Commission can therefore confirm that the eight counties of
Cavan, Donegal, Galway, Leitrim, Mayo, Monaghan, Roscommon and Sligo remain eligible for Objective 1
until 31 December 2006 while Clare will remain eligible for Objective 1 in transition.

It is not expected that the inclusion of Clare in the North-West constituency will have any impact on the
implementation of programmes in the regions eligible for Objective 1 and Objective 1 in transition
respectively.