European Parliament resolution on State aid in the form of public service compensation (2004/2186(INI))
Date: 2005-02-22
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: State aid, competition law, competition policy, derogation from EU law, provision of services, services of general interest

1.12.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 304 E/117

Tuesday 22 February 2005

P6_TA(2005)0033

State aid in the form of public service compensation

European Parliament resolution on State aid in the form of public service compensation (2004/2186
(INI))

The European Parliament,

— having regard to the Commission draft decision on the application of Article 86 of the Treaty to State
aid in the form of public service compensation granted to certain undertakings entrusted with the
operation of services of general economic interest, of 18 February 2004, as transmitted to the European
Parliament for opinion on 8 September 2004,

— having regard to the Commission draft directive amending Directive 80/723/EEC on the transparency of
financial relations between Member States and public undertakings, of 18 February 2004, as trans-
mitted to the European Parliament for opinion on 8 September 2004,

— having regard to the Commission working paper on a Community framework for State aid in the form
of public service compensation (the ‘Framework’), as transmitted to the European Parliament for
opinion on 8 September 2004,

— having regard to Articles 2, 5, 16, 73, 86, 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty,

— having regard to its previous resolutions on services of general interest, in particular to its resolutions:
of 17 December 1997 on the communication from the Commission on services of general interest in
Europe (1); of 18 May 2000 on the draft directive amending Commission Directive 80/723/EEC on the
transparency of financial relations between Member States and public undertakings (2); of 13 November
2001 on the Commission communication ‘Services of General Interest in Europe’ (3) and its resolution
of 14 January 2004 on the Green Paper on services of general interest (4),

— having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 69/2001 of 12 January 2001 on the application of

Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to de minimis aid (5),

— having regard to the Commission Green paper on services of general interest (COM(2003)0270) and to
the communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — White Paper on services of
general interest (COM(2004)0374),

— having regard to the Presidency Conclusions of the Lisbon European Council of 23 and 24 March
2000, the Laeken European Council of 14 and 15 December 2001 and the Barcelona European Council
of 15 and 16 March 2002, the latter two of which request the Commission to bring some clarity to the
State aid regime in the framework of Article 86(2) of the Treaty,

— having regard to the November 2004 report from the High Level Group chaired by Wim Kok regarding
the Lisbon Strategy entitled ‘Facing the challenge — the Lisbon strategy for growth and employment’ (6),

— having regard to Articles I-3; I-5; II-96; III-122; III-166; III-167; III-238 of the Treaty establishing a

Constitution for Europe, as signed by Member States in Rome on 29 October 2004,

— having regard to the case-law of the European Court of Justice relating to services of general interest,

and in particular to the Altmark judgment of 24 July 2003 (7),

— having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions of 29 September 2004,

(1) OJ C 14, 19.1.1998, p. 74.
(2) OJ C 59, 23.2.2001, p. 238.
(3) OJ C 140 E, 13.6.2002, p. 153.
(4) OJ C 92 E, 16.4.2004, p. 294.
(5) OJ L 10, 13.1.2001, p. 30.
(6) http://europa.eu.int/growthandjobs/group/index_en.htm
(7) Case C-280/00 Altmark Trans GmbH and Regierungspräsidium Magdeburg v. Nahverkehrsgesellschaft Altmark

GmbH, and Oberbundesanwalt beim Bundesverwaltungsgericht [2003] ECR I-7747.

C 304 E/118

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

1.12.2005

Tuesday 22 February 2005

— having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 12 October 2004,

— having regard to Rules 45 and 112(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

— having regard to the report of the Economic and Monetary Affairs (A6-0034/2005),

A. whereas high-quality services of general

interest (SGI), accessible to all, are not only an important
element of social and economic cohesion, but may also contribute considerably to the competitiveness
of the European economy,

B. whereas the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe recognises the right of local authorities to
self-government (Article I-5) and makes territorial cohesion a general overall objective of the Union
(Article I-3),

C. whereas the interest of the citizen in his dual role of consumer (of services) and taxpayer must be the
guiding principle; whereas compensation to undertakings providing SGIs must be granted with the sole
purpose of securing the provision of high-quality, accessible and affordable services; other objectives
must be attained with other forms of support,

D. whereas, without prejudice to the existing internal market rules, local public services are run on the
basis of decisions taken by democratically legitimised bodies close to the citizens and able to respond
adequately and innovatively to citizens' needs,

E. whereas the internal market, liberalisation and compliance with the rules on competition have on the
whole led to improved access to SGIs, new services with more choice, better quality and lower costs for
consumers,

F. whereas, with a view to evidence-based policy making, the Commission should present a sound and
exhaustive evaluation of the liberalisation process, taking into account the point of view of all stake-
holders involved (users, local authorities, undertakings, etc.),

G. whereas the total amount of state aid granted each year in the European Union is equivalent to more
than 50 % of the annual budget of the European Union even by the most conservative estimates;
whereas state aid has consequences for public finances, for competition and for the ability of private
undertakings to invest in a globalised economic environment; whereas state aid compensation is raised
from European taxpayers and must therefore be spent responsibly, providing value for money,

H. whereas it is not always possible to clearly distinguish two separate categories, namely SGI and Services
of General Economic Interest (SGEI), as the qualification ‘non-economic’ has two dimensions: the objec-
tive and purpose of the service and the legal form of the provider (public, private or other) and the
economic context in which it operates (free market, regulated market, state monopoly, etc.); whereas
there are great differences across the Member States on both aspects, making a single European defini-
tion both impossible and contrary to the principles of subsidiarity and self-government; whereas for
practical and operational purposes, however, it is necessary to draw up criteria for establishing under
what circumstances exemptions to the competition rules may be granted; whereas the qualification
‘non-economic’ must rest on criteria concerning both the purpose of the service on the one hand,
and the service provider and economic context on the other,

I. whereas public authorities retain sole responsibility at all times for setting the framework of criteria and
conditions for service provision, irrespective of the legal status of the provider and of whether the
service is provided on the basis of free competition,

J. whereas the setting of framework criteria and conditions for SGIs and the expected level of service are
very much a question of national, regional or local traditions, and should therefore be left to the
competent national, regional and local authorities,
in the context of their right of self-government,
and without prejudice to the current internal market rules,

1.12.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 304 E/119

K. whereas such a service should be assigned by way of an official act outlining the details of the service
obligation, so as to ensure that only recognised SGIs will benefit from the proposed arrangements,

Tuesday 22 February 2005

L. whereas the assignment by such an official act must satisfy transparency criteria and be based on equal

conditions for all competitors,

M. whereas the concept of compensation encompasses any type of aid, whether in the form of cash or
physical or human resources, or based on a legal provision or on the legal nature of the beneficiary's
status with respect to the financing of the contract,

N. whereas the Commission proposal applies only to cases which do not satisfy the four criteria defined by
the Court of Justice in its Altmark judgment; whereas compensation is not deemed to be state aid if
those four criteria are satisfied,

O. whereas the amount of compensation may not exceed what is necessary for the operation of the service
and must not be used to finance activities outside the scope of the service in question (so-called cross-
subsidies),

P. whereas compensation must be available to all operators, irrespective of their legal status, which are

entrusted with providing SGIs,

Q. whereas the granting of state aid to a monopoly usually constitutes an obstacle to a properly function-

ing market, and must therefore be thoroughly investigated and justified,

R. whereas the service for which compensation or state aid is permissible under the proposed arrange-
ments should be assigned either by way of a fair and transparent tendering procedure or by way of an
official act that, depending on the law in the Member States, may take the form of one or more legis-
lative or regulatory instruments or a contract,

S. whereas it is difficult to judge the scope and impact of the proposals without data on the number of

undertakings, the total amount of state aid and the total administrative burden involved,

T. whereas the justification for granting state aid to undertakings responsible for an SGI or state compen-
sation should be reviewed at regular and appropriate intervals as new services emerge or, conversely, as
existing services become obsolete or are provided by means of new instruments owing to technological
progress and changes in society,

U. whereas effective, stringent controls over the granting of state aid or compensation are required in

order to ensure fair competition and transparency and to avoid discrimination,

V. whereas, when applying the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, the Commission should focus
on controlling infringements that have a significant impact on the internal market; whereas local public
services do not normally affect cross-border trade,

General

1. Welcomes the proposals of the Commission and endorses the aims of reducing unnecessary red tape
and providing legal clarification; notes that, as announced by the Commission in its abovementioned White
Paper on services of general interest, legal clarification must include a definition of when compensation does
not constitute state aid; calls on the Commission, however, to clarify what does not constitute state aid;

C 304 E/120

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

1.12.2005

Tuesday 22 February 2005

2.
Recommends that the arrangements be put in place without delay, so as to limit to a minimum the
legal gap that exists between the pronouncement of the Altmark ruling and the date on which the proposed
arrangements are to enter into force; considers that, pending their entry into force, these arrangements
should apply to all state aid granted after the Altmark ruling and fulfilling the conditions laid down in
Articles 1 and 2 of the Decision; considers that state aid not fulfilling those conditions should be dealt
with in accordance with the relevant framework directives, guidelines and opinions;

3.
Calls on the Commission to clarify adequately all the legal consequences of the proposed instruments
and how they interact and their compatibility with existing EU rules concerning public procurement and
with sector-specific EU legislative provisions;

Asks the Commission to clarify the legal status of the Framework, also with a view to enabling the

4.
European Parliament to play its full role in this highly political debate;

5.
Points out that the criteria from the Altmark ruling need to be developed and clarified further, in
particular the fourth criterion, with its reference to a typical well-run undertaking; calls on the Commission,
therefore, to complete the work on the communication interpreting the Altmark ruling that has been
announced; suggests that a benchmarking exercise be carried out, coupled with adequate consultation with
stakeholders, to clarify these criteria further, with a view to achieving legal certainty;

With regard to the Framework

6.

Endorses the general approach of the Commission in the Framework;

7. Welcomes the planned exemption for public service broadcasters (point 4), since this recognises the
specific characteristics of public service broadcasting as compared to other SGEIs and the powers of the
Member States as acknowledged by the Amsterdam Protocol;

8. Welcomes the fact that the Commission has decided to consult the European Parliament on the pro-
posed framework;

9.
Stresses that the institutions with the relevant democratic legitimacy, namely national, regional and
local authorities, should be responsible for defining SGEIs and for imposing obligations on and assessing the
service providers entrusted therewith;

10.
Stresses the need to consult widely, with a particular emphasis on users, both when defining service
obligations and in assessing whether service obligations are met by the provider; considers that, since state
aid is allowed for the provision of a particular service, user satisfaction is the main justification for the
granting thereof;

11.
Calls for the rules for undertakings using any over-compensation to finance another SGEI operated by
the same undertaking to be applied strictly; such a transfer must be shown in the undertaking's accounts
and must be carried out in accordance with the principles set out in the Framework; the Member States
must ensure that such transfers are subject to proper control; the transparency rules laid down in Commis-
sion Directive 80/723/EEC (1) should apply;

12.
Points out that point 22 (any over-compensation to a public undertaking may be used by the State in
its capacity as shareholder to inject finance into that undertaking) seems not to be in line with the principle
of neutrality; proposes that it be redrafted so as to cover all providers, regardless of their legal form;

Considers that ‘undertaking’ should be understood as meaning every entity engaged in an economic
13.
activity, regardless of the legal status of the entity and the way in which it is financed; ‘public undertaking’
should be understood as meaning any undertaking over which the public authorities may exercise directly or
indirectly a dominant influence by virtue of their ownership of it, their financial participation therein, or the
rules which govern it, as defined in Article 2(1)(b) of Directive 80/723/EEC;

(1) OJ L 195, 29.7.1980, p. 35.

1.12.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 304 E/121

Tuesday 22 February 2005

14.
Considers that the Framework should remain valid for four years following its entry into force;
advocates evidence-based policy-making and therefore proposes making the renewal of the Framework sub-
ject to a review, including an extensive impact assessment, based on factual information and wide consul-
tation, with particular emphasis on users; the relevant information should be made available to the Euro-
pean Parliament;

15. Welcomes, in particular, point 11 of the Framework relating to social charges;

With regard to the Draft Decision on the application of Article 86 of the Treaty

16.

Requests the Commission to clearly define the scope of the Draft Decision;

Proposes that ‘small’ SGEIs should be defined as undertakings which do not substantially affect the
17.
development of trade and competition, as their turnover is limited or because their activities are of a highly
local nature;

Except in the case of ‘small’ SGEIs, as referred to in paragraph 17, insists that, where state aid for SGIs
18.
is permissible, such services should be assigned either by way of a fair and transparent tendering process,
whereby the amount of state aid is objectively established, or by way of an official act that, depending on
the law in the Member States, may take the form of one or more legislative or regulatory instruments or a
contract;

19.
Is of the opinion that the threshold for exempting public service compensation from notification
requirements should be high enough to ensure sufficient flexibility and minimum administrative burden,
without unnecessarily distorting competition; agrees in principle to the references suggested by the Com-
mission, i.e. the standard definition of an SME and the threshold for compensation;

Considers that the Decision should remain valid for four years following its entry into force; advo-
20.
cates evidence-based policy-making and therefore proposes making renewal of the Decision subject to a
review, including an extensive impact assessment based on factual information and wide consultation, with
particular emphasis on users; the relevant information should be made available to the European Parliament;

Asks the Commission to clarify whether the turnover threshold relates to the undertaking as a whole

21.
or to the individual activities of the undertaking;

22.
Calls for additional provisions to avoid the risk of larger undertakings being divided into smaller
entities, in order to circumvent the threshold; considers that the same applies to sectors which are made
up of many small providers which essentially operate as a single operator;

23.
Notes that the scope of the draft Decision includes hospitals and social housing undertakings,
although high volumes of aid may lead to distortions of competition in these areas too; points out that
these sectors are also of interest to private operators; points out, furthermore, that the granting of subsidies
may have a detrimental effect on competition; in view of this, considers that agreed rules on transparency
and the obligation of each Member State to submit a detailed description of the way in which hospitals and
social housing undertakings are organised and financed should be strictly applied;

24.

Asks the Commission to clarify what principles it will apply when assessing individual cases;

25.
Considers that, in the field of transport, this decision should only apply to public service compen-
sation for maritime and air links to islands and to air and land links to remote and isolated settlements,
granted in accordance with sectoral rules, on which annual traffic does not exceed 300 000 passengers;

C 304 E/122

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

1.12.2005

Tuesday 22 February 2005

With regard to the Draft Directive on transparency

Agrees with the Commission that the criteria from the Altmark ruling need to be clarified further;
26.
makes it clear, however, that since the transparency directive is part of the legislative package on state aid,
which is intended solely to ensure the policing thereof, its scope must not extend beyond the issue of state
aid itself; agrees also with the Commission that undertakings to which compensation is granted in line with
the criteria from the Altmark ruling must not be exempted from the requirement to maintain separate
accounts;

27.
Notes that there seems to be a time gap between the pronouncement of the Altmark ruling (July
2003), the proposed Framework and Decision (first half of 2005) and the deadline for Member States to
comply with the transparency directive (more than 12 months after its publication in the Official Journal);
seeks clarification from the Commission as to the provisions in force during this period and possible gaps;

Modifications

28.
Calls on the Commission to take account of the following modifications to its draft decision on the
application of Article 86 of the Treaty to State aid in the form of public service compensation granted to
certain undertakings entrusted with the operation of services of general economic interest:

DRAFT DECISION

MODIFICATIONS BY PARLIAMENT

Modification 1

Recital 2a (new)

‘Undertaking’ should be defined as every entity engaged
(2a)
in an economic activity, regardless of the legal status of the
entity and the way in which it is financed. ‘Public undertak-
ing’ should be as defined in Article 2(1)(b) of Commission
Directive 80/723/EEC of 25 June 1980 on the transparency
of financial relations between Member States and public
undertakings (1).

(1) OJ L 195, 29.7.1980, p. 35. Directive as last amended by Direc-

tive 2000/52/EC (OJ L 193, 29.7.2000, p. 75).

Modification 2

Article 1, point (i)

(i) public service compensation granted to undertakings with
an annual turnover before tax, all activities included, of less
than (…) [*] during the two financial years preceding that
in which the SGEI was assigned and with annual compen-
sation for the service in question of less than (…) [**]. The
latter threshold may be determined by taking an annual
average representing the present value of compensation
granted during the contract period or over a period of five
years. For credit
is
replaced by a threshold of (…) [***] in terms of balance-
sheet total;

the threshold of

institutions,

(…)

(i) public service compensation granted to undertakings with
an annual turnover before tax, all activities included, of less
than EUR 50 million during the two financial years
preceding that in which the SGEI was assigned and with
annual compensation for the service in question of
less
than EUR 15 million. The latter threshold may be deter-
mined by taking an annual average representing the present
value of compensation granted during the contract period
or over a period of five years. For credit institutions, the
threshold of EUR 50 million is replaced by a threshold of
EUR 800 million in terms of balance-sheet total;

1.12.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 304 E/123

DRAFT DECISION

MODIFICATIONS BY PARLIAMENT

Tuesday 22 February 2005

Modification 3

Article 1, point (ii)

(ii) Public service compensation granted to hospitals that carry
out activities involving services of general economic inter-
est;

(ii) Public service compensation granted to hospitals that carry
out activities involving services of general economic inter-
est, provided that the Member State concerned submits to
the Commission a detailed description of the way in
which the hospital sector is organised and financed in
that Member State, to enable the Commission to assess
whether such compensation is compatible with the Treaty.
The Member State concerned shall notify the Commission
of any changes in the organisation or financing of that
sector.

Modification 4

Article 1, point (iii)

(iii) Public service compensation granted to social housing
undertakings that carry out activities involving services of
general economic interest.

(iii) Public service compensation granted to social housing
undertakings that carry out activities involving services of
general economic interest, provided that the Member State
submits to the Commission a detailed description of the
way in which social housing undertakings are organised
and financed in that Member State, to enable the Com-
mission to assess whether such compensation is compat-
ible with the Treaty. The Member State concerned shall
notify the Commission of any changes in the organisation
or financing of those undertakings.

Modification 5

Article 1, point (iv)

(iv)

in the field of transport, this decision only applies to public
service compensation for maritime links to islands, granted
in accordance with sectoral rules, on which annual traffic
does not exceed 100 000 passengers.

(iv)

in the field of transport, this decision only applies to public
service compensation for maritime and air links to islands
and to maritime, air and land links to remote and isolated
settlements, granted in accordance with sectoral rules, on
which annual traffic does not exceed 300 000 passengers.

Modification 6

Article 1, paragraph 1a (new)

This Decision shall apply without prejudice to the rules

1a.
laid down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty.

Modification 7

Article 2

In so far as it constitutes State aid, public service compensation
that meets the conditions laid down by this Decision is compat-
ible with the common market and shall be exempt from the

In so far as it constitutes State aid, public service compensation
that meets the conditions laid down by this Decision is compat-
ible with the common market and shall be exempt from the

C 304 E/124

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

1.12.2005

Tuesday 22 February 2005

DRAFT DECISION

MODIFICATIONS BY PARLIAMENT

obligation of prior notification provided for in Article 88(3) of
the Treaty, without prejudice to the existence of stricter provi-
sions relating to public service obligations contained in sectoral
Community legislation.

obligation of prior notification provided for in Article 88(3) of
the Treaty, without prejudice to the existence of provisions relat-
ing to public service obligations contained in sectoral Commun-
ity legislation.

Modification 8

Article 4, introduction

In order to benefit from this Decision, the public service task
shall be assigned by way of an official act that, depending on
the law in the Member States, may take the form of one or
more legislative or regulatory instruments or a contract. The
act shall specify, in particular:

In order to benefit from this Decision, the public service task
shall be assigned either by way of a fair and transparent ten-
dering procedure or by way of an official act that, depending on
the law in the Member States, may take the form of one or
more legislative or regulatory instruments or a contract. The
act shall specify, in particular:

Modification 9

Article 4, point (ba) (new)

(ba)

the public need, which is otherwise inadequately met,

satisfied by the act.

Modification 10

Article 4, paragraph 1a (new)

When defining public service obligations and in assessing
whether those obligations are met by the undertaking con-
cerned, the Member States shall consult widely, with particu-
lar emphasis on users.

Modification 11

Article 4, paragraph 1b (new)

In order to benefit from this Decision, the public service task
shall be assigned either by way of a fair and transparent ten-
dering procedure or by way of an official act that, depending
on the law in the Member States, may take the form of one or
more legislative or regulatory instruments or a contract.

Modification 12

Article 7a (new)

Article 7a

This Decision shall remain valid for four years following its
entry into force. The renewal of the Decision shall be subject
to a review, including an extensive impact assessment based

1.12.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 304 E/125

DRAFT DECISION

MODIFICATIONS BY PARLIAMENT

Tuesday 22 February 2005

on factual information and wide consultation, with particular
emphasis on users. The relevant information shall be made
available to the European Parliament.

Calls on the Commission to take account of the following modifications to its working paper on a

29.
Community Framework for State Aid in the form of public service compensation:

COMMISSION WORKING PAPER
ON A COMMUNITY FRAMEWORK

MODIFICATIONS BY PARLIAMENT

Modification 13

Point 3a (new)

Pending its entry into force,

3a.
this framework also
applies to all state aid granted after the Altmark ruling and
fulfilling the conditions laid down in Articles 1 and 2 of the
Decision. State aid not fulfilling those conditions is to be dealt
with in accordance with the relevant framework directives,
guidelines and opinions.

Modification 14

Point 4

4.
The provisions of this framework apply without prejudice
to the stricter specific provisions relating to public service obli-
contained in sectoral Community legislation and
gations
measures. They are not applicable to public service broadcasting
covered by the Commission communication on the application
of state aid rules to public service broadcasting.

4.
The provisions of this framework apply without prejudice
to the specific provisions relating to public service obligations
contained in sectoral Community legislation and measures. They
are not applicable to public service broadcasting covered by the
Commission communication on the application of state aid
rules to public service broadcasting.

Modification 15

Point 7a (new)

7a.
The concept of compensation encompasses any type of
aid, whether in the form of cash or physical or human
resources. Advantages which result from a legal provision or
the legal status of the beneficiary should be taken into
account when assessing the need for compensation.

Modification 16

Point 8

8.
It results from the case law that, in the absence of Com-
munity rules governing the matter, Member States have a wide
margin of discretion regarding the nature of services that could
be classified as being SGEIs. Under these circumstances, the

8.
It results from the case law that, in the absence of Com-
munity rules governing the matter, Member States have a wide
margin of discretion regarding the nature of services that could
be classified as being SGEIs. When defining public service obli-

C 304 E/126

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

1.12.2005

Tuesday 22 February 2005

COMMISSION WORKING PAPER
ON A COMMUNITY FRAMEWORK

Commissions task is therefore to ensure that these provisions
are applied with no manifest error.
It transpires from Arti-
cle 86(2)
that undertakings entrusted with the operation of
SGEIs are undertakings entrusted with ‘a special task’.

MODIFICATIONS BY PARLIAMENT

gations and in assessing whether those obligations are met by
the undertaking concerned, the Member States shall consult
widely, with a particular emphasis on users. Under these cir-
cumstances, the Commissions task is therefore to ensure that
these provisions are applied with no manifest error. It transpires
from Article 86(2) that undertakings entrusted with the oper-
ation of SGEIs are undertakings entrusted with ‘a special task’.

Modification 17

Point 8a (new)

‘Undertaking’ shall be understood as every entity
8a.
engaged in an economic activity, regardless of the legal status
of the entity and the way in which it is financed. ‘Public
undertaking’ shall be understood as any undertaking over
which the public authorities may exercise directly or indirectly
a dominant influence by virtue of their ownership of it, their
financial participation therein, or the rules which govern it, as
defined in Article 2(1)(b) of Commission Directive 80/723/
EEC on the transparency of
relations between
Member States and public undertakings (1).

financial

(1) OJ L 195, 29.7.1980, p. 35. Directive as last amended by Direc-

tive 2000/52/EC (OJ L 193, 29.7.2000, p. 75).

Modification 18

Point 10, introduction

10.
The public service task must be assigned by way of an
official act that, depending on the legislation in Member States,
may take the form of a legislative or regulatory act or a con-
tract. It may also be laid down in several acts. The act or series
of acts should specify among other things:

10.
The public service task must be assigned either by way
of a fair and transparent tendering procedure or by way of an
official act that, depending on the legislation in Member States,
may take the form of a legislative or regulatory act or a con-
tract. It may also be laid down in several acts. The act or series
of acts should specify among other things:

Modification 19

Point 11a (new)

11a. Where state aid may be granted for an SGEI, under-
takings providing such services should still be chosen pur-
suant to a fair and transparent tendering procedure, whereby
the amount of state aid is objectively established, or by way of
an official act that, depending on the law in the Member
States, may take the form of one or more legislative or regu-
latory instruments or a contract.

1.12.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 304 E/127

COMMISSION WORKING PAPER
ON A COMMUNITY FRAMEWORK

MODIFICATIONS BY PARLIAMENT

Tuesday 22 February 2005

Modification 20

Point 11b (new)

11b.
Public authorities remain solely and primarily respon-
sible at all times for setting the framework of criteria and
conditions for the provision of services, regardless of the legal
status of the provider and of whether the service is provided
on the basis of free competition.

Modification 21

Point 11c (new)

11c. When defining public
service obligations and in
assessing whether those obligations are met by the undertak-
ing concerned, the Member States should consult widely, with
particular emphasis on users.

Modification 22

Point 21

21.
Any over-compensation may be used to finance another
SGEI operated by the same undertaking, but such a transfer
must be shown in the undertaking's accounts.

21.
Any over-compensation may be used to finance another
SGEI operated by the same undertaking, but such a transfer
must be shown in the undertaking's accounts and be carried
out in accordance with the rules and principles set out in
this framework. The Member States shall ensure that such
transfers are subjected to proper control. The transparency
rules laid down in Directive 80/723/EEC shall apply.

Modification 23

Point 22

In cases where compensation benefits a public undertak-
22.
ing, any over-compensation may be used by the State in its
capacity as shareholder to inject finance into that undertaking
provided that the private investor criterion is met. However,
such transfers must be carried out in accordance with normal
commercial procedures, i.e. in the form of a capital increase or
the granting of
loans, and must comply with the relevant
national rules, notably in the commercial and tax fields. This
operation must be clearly identified in the balance sheet of the
recipient undertaking and must be the result of a formal deci-
sion by the public authorities. This decision must identify the
exact use to which the financial transfer is to be put. If, though,
the financial injection by the State does not comply with the
private investor criterion, it must be notified to the Commission
in accordance with Article 88(3) of the Treaty.

In cases where compensation benefits an undertaking,
22.
regardless of the legal form thereof, any over-compensation
may be used by the State in its capacity as shareholder to inject
finance into that undertaking provided that the private investor
criterion is met. However, such transfers must be carried out in
accordance with normal commercial procedures, i.e. in the form
of a capital increase or the granting of loans, and must comply
with the relevant national rules, notably in the commercial and
tax fields. This operation must be clearly identified in the bal-
ance sheet of the recipient undertaking and must be the result
of a formal decision by the public authorities. This decision
must identify the exact use to which the financial transfer is to
be put. If, though, the financial injection by the State does not
comply with the private investor criterion, it must be notified to
the Commission in accordance with Article 88(3) of the Treaty.

C 304 E/128

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

1.12.2005

Tuesday 22 February 2005

COMMISSION WORKING PAPER
ON A COMMUNITY FRAMEWORK

MODIFICATIONS BY PARLIAMENT

Modification 24
Point 24

24.
This framework will apply as of its publication in the
Official Journal of the European Union. Its validity will end on
31 December 2007. The Commission may, after consulting the
Member States, amend this framework before 31 December
2007 for important reasons linked to the development of the
common market.

24.
This framework will apply as of its publication in the
Official Journal of the European Union. Its term of validity will
end four years after its entry into force. The Commission may,
after consulting the Member States, amend this framework
before its date of expiry for important reasons linked to the
development of
the common market. The renewal of the
framework shall be subject to a review including an extensive
impact assessment based on factual
information and the
results of wide consultations conducted by the Commission
on the basis of data provided by the Member States. The rel-
evant information shall be made available to the European
Parliament.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and Commission, and to the govern-

30.
ments and parliaments of the Member States.

P6_TA(2005)0034

Broad economic guidelines

European Parliament resolution on the European economic situation — preparatory report on the
Broad Economic Policy Guidelines (2004/2269(INI))

The European Parliament,

— having regard to the Commission recommendation of 24 April 2003 on the Broad Guidelines of the
Economic Policies of the Member States and the Community (for the 2003-2005 period) (COM(2003)
0170),

— having regard to the Commission recommendation of 7 April 2004 on the 2004 update of the Broad
Guidelines of the Economic Policies of the Member States and the Community (for the 2003-2005
period) (COM(2004)0238),

— having regard to the Commission's autumn 2004 economic forecasts for the eurozone and the Euro-

pean Union (2004-2006),

— having regard to the Communication of 2 February 2005 from the Commission to the Spring
‘Working together for growth and jobs — a new start for the Lisbon strategy’

European Council
(COM(2005)0024),

— having regard to the Presidency Conclusions of the Lisbon European Council of 23 and 24 March
2000, the Göteborg European Council of 15 and 16 June 2001 and the Barcelona European Council
of 15 and 16 March 2002,

— having regard to the Presidency Conclusions of the Brussels European Councils of 20 and 21 March

2003, 16 and 17 October 2003, 25 and 26 March 2004 and 4 and 5 November 2004,

— having regard to the report entitled ‘Facing the Challenge’ by the High-Level Group chaired by Mr Wim

Kok,