natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
According to Article 30 of its Articles of association of 23 November 2001, AGVO is granted the exclusive right to use, free of charge, the land and buildings of the Ostend fishing port [9].
novembril 2001 kinnitatud põhikirja artikli 30 järgi anti AGVO-le Oostende kalasadama maa ja hoonete tasuta kasutamise ainuõigus [9].
Article 30 of the articles of association also indicates that the City can at a later stage transfer the property rights (or other rights) in those land and buildings to AGVO.
Põhikirja artikkel 30 osutab ka sellele, et linn võib hilisemas etapis maa ja hoonete omandiõiguse (või muud õigused) AGVO-le üle anda.
This was the case on 26 March 2004, when the City made a contribution to AGVO by transferring to it its property rights in various buildings located in the Ostend fishing harbour consisting of 57500 m2.
märtsil 2004 tegi linn AGVO-le sissemakse, andes talle üle erinevate kinnisvaraobjektide omandiõiguse, mis asuvad Oostende kalasadamas ja mille pindala on 57500 m2.
The ground itself is used by the City on the basis of an open-ended concession from the Flemish Region, the owner of the plots of land.
Maad kasutab linn avatud kontsessioonilepingu alusel Flaami piirkonnaga, kes on maa omanik.
AGVO continued to have the exclusive right to use these lands on the basis of Article 30 of its articles of association.
AGVO-le jäi ainuõigus maa kasutamiseks põhikirja artikli 30 alusel.
The transfer of immovable property of 26 March 2004 included 14754 m2 of buildings subject to a long-term lease between the City and PAKHUIZEN concluded in 1989 for a period of 45 years.
Kinnisvara üleandmine 26. märtsil 2004 sisaldas 14754 m2 hooneid, mis kuulusid pikaajalise rendilepingu alla, mis oli 1989. aastal linna ja PAKHUIZENi vahel 45 aastaks sõlmitud.
Under this contract, PAKHUIZEN pays a token rent of BEF 1000 (EUR 25) per year for the use of the buildings.
Lepingu järgi maksab PAKHUIZEN hoonete kasutamise eest sümboolset tasu 1000 Belgia franki (25 eurot) aastas.
In return, PAKHUIZEN is contractually required, at its expense and without entitlement to compensation, to renovate the warehouses described in the long-term lease so that they will comply with future regulations.
Vastutasuks nõutakse PAKHUIZENilt lepingujärgselt, et ta oma kulul ja õiguseta hüvitisele renoveeriks pikaajalises rendilepingus kirjeldatud laod nii, et nad vastaksid tulevastele määrustele.
Furthermore, after 27 years of lease (in 2016), the City will be granted 50 % every year of PAKHUIZEN’s net annual profit.
Teisest küljest, pärast rendilepingu kehtimist 27 aastat (2016. aastal) antakse linnale PAKHUIZENi aastasest netokasumist 50 %.
The exact amount of the costs of the works undertaken in 2007 is not known.
aastal teostatud tööde täpne maksumus ei ole teada.
From 26 March 2004, the date on which the City transferred the ownership of the building to AGVO, AGVO replaced the City as the contracting party in the long-term lease with PAKHUIZEN.
Alates 26. märtsist 2004, mil linn andis hoonete omandiõiguse AGVO-le üle, asendas AGVO linna lepingupoolena pikaajalises rendilepingus PAKHUIZENiga.
By doing so, AGVO became entitled to collect the EUR 25 per year, as well as to obtain after 27 years of lease, 50 % of PAKHUIZEN’s net annual profit.
Sellega sai AGVO õiguse koguda 25 eurot aastas, samuti õiguse pärast rendilepingu kehtimist 27 aastat saada PAKHUIZENi aastasest netokasumist 50 %.
According to the information provided by Belgium, the 57500 m2 thus made available to AGVO are distributed as follows:
Sel moel AGVO kasutusse saadud 57500 m2 jaguneb Belgia ametiasutuste sõnul järgmiselt:
13600 m2 used by the subsidiary EVO to house the fish auction, as working/storage space and administrative buildings,
13600 m2 kasutab tütarettevõte EVO kalaoksjoni hoonena, tööruumi või angaarina ja administratiivhoonena;
14754 m2 rented to PAKHUIZEN, of which 955 m2 are used for port activities,
14754 m2 on renditud PAKHUIZENile, millest 955 m2 kasutatakse sadamategevuseks;
2700 m2 of warehouses rented to (semi-) public-law institutions,
2700 m2 ladusid on renditud avalik-õiguslikele või avalik-õigusliku juriidilise isiku osalusega institutsioonidele;
8156 m2 of public roads,
8156 m2 on avalikult kasutatavad teed;
2488 m2 which are used as free public parking,
2488 m2 on avalikud tasuta parkimisalad;
2400 m2 which are used as a container park for fisheries activities,
2400 m2 on kasutusel kui kalandustegevusega seotud konteineripark;
13402 m2 of docks.
13402 m2 on dokid.
EVO does not pay rent for the use of the buildings.
EVO ei maksa hoonete kasutamise eest renti.
Belgium has stated that, in return, EVO pays for all maintenance and renovation costs.
Belgia on teatanud, et vastutasuks katab EVO kõik hooldus- ja renoveerimiskulud.
PAKHUIZEN continues to pay 25 EUR per year.
PAKHUIZEN maksab jätkuvalt 25 eurot aastas.
The Belgian authorities have indicated that between 31 December 2002 and 31 December 2007 EVO and PAKHUIZEN have paid respectively EUR 182377,31 and EUR 381835,16 for renovation and infrastructure works and EUR 193255,70 and EUR 133895,35 for maintenance costs.
Belgia ametiasutused on viidanud, et 31. detsembrist 2002 kuni 31. detsembrini 2007 on EVO ja PAKHUIZEN maksnud vastavalt 182377,31 eurot ja 381835,16 eurot renoveerimise ja infrastruktuuritööde eest ning 193255,70 eurot ja 133895,35 eurot hoolduskulude eest.
COMMERCIAL STRATEGY
ÄRISTRATEEGIA
Despite those cumulated losses, AGVO and EVO engaged in speculative activities and in expanding their activities.
Hoolimata sellest kumulatiivsest kahjumist, olid AGVO ja EVO hõivatud spekulatiivsete tegevustega ning laiendasid oma tegevusi.
For instance in 2006 AGVO took a 51 % shareholding in a company called HAF Holding BO established in Iceland, while EVO engaged in a King crab project [10] in 2006 (Polardrift, an undertaking established in Norway).
Näiteks 2006. aastal ostis AGVO 51 % osaluse Islandil asutatud äriühingu HAF Holding BO aktsiakapitalis ning EVO tegeles 2006. aastal kuningkrabi projektiga [10] (ettevõte Polardrift, asutatud Norras).
EVO was also involved in the Icelandic HAF Holding.
EVO tegutses ka Islandi ettevõttes HAF Holding.
Furthermore, in 2005 EVO concluded a contract with a sales agent under which the agent was mandated to purchase high quality fish on Icelandic auctions which would then be resold at the Ostend fish auction.
Lisaks sõlmis EVO 2005. aastal lepingu müügiesindajaga, kes oli lepingujärgselt volitatud Islandi oksjonitelt ostma kvaliteetset kala, mis seejärel müüdaks uuesti Oostende kalaoksjonil.
The commercial strategy of EVO has been described by the various stakeholders as unfair competition consisting of offering, among others, to bear all or part of the costs of the transport of fish embarked in foreign harbours to Ostend and of offering loans to vessel-owners at advantageous conditions on the condition that they auction their catches in Ostend.
EVO äristrateegiat on erinevad huvirühmad kirjeldanud kui ebaausat konkurentsi, mis muu hulgas hõlmab pakkumist kanda kõik või osa kala transpordikuludest, mis saabub välissadamatest Oostendesse, ning soodsatel tingimustel laenu pakkumist laevaomanikele, kui nad toovad oma kalasaagi Oostendesse oksjonile.
These projects, as well as the commercial strategy described by third parties, seem to indicate that EVO undertook to expand its market share and its turnover at any cost.
Need projektid ja kolmandate isikute kirjeldatud äristrateegia näivad osutavat, et EVO otsustas iga hinna eest suurendada oma turuosa ja käivet.
In any event, the annual accounts of AGVO and EVO indicate that EVO could maintain its presence on the market, despite its precarious financial situation, only thanks to the support of the City [11].
Igal juhul näitavad AGVO ja EVO raamatupidamise aastaaruanded, et hoolimata ebakindlast finantsolukorrast suutis EVO kohaloleku turul säilitada ainult tänu linna toetusele [11].
ADVANTAGES GRANTED TO AGVO
AGVO-LE ANTUD EELISED
AGVO has been granted an initial capital of BEF 250 million (EUR 6179338).
AGVO-le on määratud algkapitaliks 250 miljonit Belgia franki (6179338 eurot).
Considering the heavy losses of the past and the very short and incomplete business plan, the Commission concluded in the decision to open the formal investigation procedure that a private investor would not have invested such an amount in the fish auction and that this starting capital therefore qualifies as State aid.
Arvestades suuri kahjumeid minevikus ning väga lühikest ja puudulikku äriplaani, otsustas komisjon algatada ametliku uurimismenetluse, kuna erainvestor ei oleks niisugust summat kalaoksjonisse investeerinud ning seepärast kvalifitseerub see stardikapital kui riigiabi.
The Commission expressed doubts regarding its compatibility with the internal market since the conditions laid down in the Guidelines for aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty, applicable at the time the aid was granted, (hereinafter ‘the 1999 R & R Guidelines’) [12] did not seem to be fulfilled.
Komisjon väljendas kahtlusi seoses selle kokkusobivusega siseturuga, kuna tingimused, mis on sätestatud raskustes olevate äriühingute päästmiseks ja ümberkorraldamiseks antava abi suunistes, mida kohaldati abi andmise ajal (edaspidi „päästmise ja ümberkorraldamise 1999. aasta suunised”), [12] ei olnud ilmselt täidetud.
The City also contributed its buildings to AGVO without requiring any consideration or imposing obligations on AGVO of a similar value.
Samuti andis linn AGVO-le üle hooned mingit tasu nõudmata või ilma AGVO-le samas väärtuses kohustusi seadmata.
The Commission considered that a private investor would have required a reasonable price for such a contribution, so that the contribution of the buildings had to be considered State aid.
Komisjon oli seisukohal, et erainvestor oleks sellise panuse eest mõistlikku hinda nõudnud ja hoonete üleandmist tuleb käsitleda riigiabina.
This aid, which seemed to reduce AGVO’s production costs, appeared to constitute operating aid.
See abi ilmselt vähendas AGVO tootmiskulusid ja kujutas endast tegevusabi.
The Commission could not find any provision in Article 107 TFEU or in the Guidelines for the examination of State aid to fisheries and aquaculture (hereinafter ‘the Fisheries Guidelines’) [13] that would enable it to allow the aid.
Komisjon ei leidnud ühtegi sätet Euroopa Liidu toimimise lepingu artiklis 107 ega kalandus- ja akvakultuurisektori riigiabi kontrollimise suunistes (edaspidi „kalandussuunised”), [13] mis oleksid võimaldanud komisjonil abi lubada.
The City also provided guarantees for loans for AGVO.
Linn andis tagatise ka AGVO laenudele.
While a private operator would have required a premium for the guarantee, the City granted it free of charge.
Kui eraettevõtja oleks nõudnud tagatise eest kindlustusmakset, siis linn andis tagatise tasuta.
Thus, the Commission concluded that these guarantees had to be considered State aid.
Seetõttu järeldas komisjon, et neid tagatisi tuleb pidada riigiabiks.
Again, this aid appeared to reduce the production costs of AGVO and thus to constitute operating aid.
Veel kord, see abi ilmselt vähendas AGVO tootmiskulusid ja kujutas endast tegevusabi.
The Commission could not find any provision in Article 107 TFEU or in the Fisheries Guidelines that would have allowed it to consider it compatible with the internal market.
Komisjon ei leidnud ühtegi sätet Euroopa Liidu toimimise lepingu artiklis 107 ega kalandussuunistes, mis oleksid võimaldanud komisjonil pidada seda siseturuga kokkusobivaks.
Finally, the City empowered AGVO to establish and collect community tax duties, and to use the proceeds, an advantage which a private undertaking generally does not have.
Lõpuks andis linn AGVO-le õiguse määrata ja koguda kohalikke makse ning kasutada tulusid, mis on eelis, mida eraettevõtjal üldiselt ei ole.
The Commission considered that the conditions laid down in Altmark [14] were not fulfilled and that the advantages deriving from the right to levy and collect the community tax duties should be considered State aid.
Komisjon leidis, et Altmarki kohtuotsuse [14] tingimused ei olnud täidetud ja et eeliseid, mis tulenevad õigusest kohalikke makse määrata ja neid koguda, tuleb pidada riigiabiks.
In the absence of any information on that levy, the Commission concluded that it had at first sight to be analyzed as operating aid and that no provision in Article 107 TFEU or in the Fisheries Guidelines would make this aid compatible with the internal market.
Et maksukogumise kohta teave puudus, järeldas komisjon, et seda tuleb algusest peale analüüsida kui tegevusabi ning et mitte ükski säte Euroopa Liidu toimimise lepingu artiklis 107 ega kalandussuunistes ei saa muuta seda abi siseturuga kokkusobivaks.
ADVANTAGES GRANTED TO EVO
EVO-LE ANTUD EELISED
The City and AGVO provided guarantees for loans for EVO.
Linn ja AGVO andsid EVO laenudele tagatised.
While a private operator would have required a premium for the guarantees, the City and AGVO granted them free of charge and the Commission concluded that they must be considered State aid.
Kui eraettevõtja oleks nõudnud tagatise eest kindlustusmakset, siis linn ja AGVO andsid tagatise tasuta ning komisjon järeldas, et neid tagatisi tuleb pidada riigiabiks.
This aid appeared to reduce the production costs of EVO and to constitute operating aid.
See abi ilmselt vähendas EVO tootmiskulusid ja kujutas endast tegevusabi.
AGVO allowed EVO the continuous free use of the buildings owned by AGVO of a total of 13600 m2.
AGVO lubas EVO-l jätkuvalt tasuta kasutada AGVO-le kuuluvaid hooneid kogupinnaga 13600 m2.
The Commission considered that a private investor would have required a reasonable price for it and that making the buildings available free of charge had to be considered State aid.
Komisjon oli seisukohal, et erainvestor oleks selle eest mõistlikku hinda nõudnud ja et niisugust hoonete tasuta kasutamise võimalust tuleb pidada riigiabiks.
This aid, which seemed to reduce EVO’s production costs, appeared to constitute operating aid.
See abi ilmselt vähendas EVO tootmiskulusid ja kujutas endast tegevusabi.
The Commission could not find any provision in Article 107 TFEU or in the Fisheries Guidelines that would have allowed it to consider it compatible with the internal market. it therefore doubted whether these measures could be considered compatible with the internal market.
Komisjon ei leidnud ühtegi sätet Euroopa Liidu toimimise lepingu artiklis 107 ega kalandussuunistes, mis oleksid võimaldanud komisjonil pidada seda siseturuga kokkusobivaks. Seetõttu väljendas komisjon kahtlust, kas see meede on siseturuga kokkusobiv.
ADVANTAGE GRANTED TO PAKHUIZEN
PAKHUIZENILE ANTUD EELISED
The effect of the terms of the long-term lease between the City and PAKHUIZEN was that PAKHUIZEN could benefit from a yearly reduction of its operating costs.
Linna ja PAKHUIZENi vahel sõlmitud pikaajalise rendilepingu tingimuste tulemusel sai PAKHUIZEN kasu oma tegevuskulude iga-aastaselt vähenemiselt.
The Commission concluded that this advantage qualified as State aid and did not fall within the scope of any of the measures mentioned in the Fisheries Guidelines, or within the objectives of other horizontal or specific guidelines which could be applicable to this kind of undertaking.
Komisjon järeldas, et see eelis kvalifitseerus riigiabiks ja ei kuulunud ühegi meetme alla, mida nimetatakse kalandussuunistes, ega teiste horisontaalsete või konkreetsete suuniste eesmärkide alla, mis oleksid kasutatavad niisuguse ettevõtja puhul.
Both under the relevant Fisheries Guidelines as well as the horizontal rules on State aid, such type of aid would be considered operating aid which is incompatible with the internal market.
Nii vastavate kalandussuuniste kui ka riigiabi horisontaaleeskirjade kohaselt peetakse niisugust liiki abi tegevusabiks, mis ei ole siseturuga kokkusobiv.
The Commission therefore doubted whether this measure could be considered compatible with the internal market.
Seetõttu väljendas komisjon kahtlust, kas see meede on siseturuga kokkusobiv.
ADVANTAGES GRANTED TO FISHERIES UNDERTAKINGS
KALANDUSETTEVÕTETELE ANTUD EELISED
The Commission further observed that fisheries undertakings making use of the Ostend fish auction were granted advantages by EVO through the provision of services at rates below those which a normal private operator would charge, and by PAKHUIZEN letting buildings at rates below those which a normal private operator would charge.
Veel täheldas komisjon, et Oostende kalaoksjonit kasutavad kalandusettevõtted said eeliseid EVO-lt, kes pakkus teenuseid allpool tariife, mida oleks tavaline eraettevõtja nõudnud, ja PAKHUIZENilt, kes küsis hoonete eest odavamat renditasu, kui tavaline eraettevõtja oleks nõudnud.
The Commission considered those advantages to constitute State aid and could not find any provision in Article 107 TFEU or in the Fisheries Guidelines that would make this aid compatible and therefore doubted whether these measures could be found compatible with the internal market.
Komisjon pidas neid eelised riigiabiks ja ei leidnud ühtegi sätet Euroopa Liidu toimimise lepingu artiklis 107 ega kalandussuunistes, mis oleksid võimaldanud komisjonil pidada seda siseturuga kokkusobivaks, ja seetõttu väljendas komisjon kahtlusi, kas need meetmed on siseturuga kokkusobivad.
In light of the foregoing and the information at its disposal, the Commission considered that all measures mentioned under section 3 had to be regarded as State aid and had doubts as to the compatibility of these aids with the internal market.
Võttes arvesse eespool esitatut ja kättesaadavat teavet, järeldas komisjon, et kõiki punktis 3 nimetatud meetmeid tuleb pidada riigiabiks, ja avaldas kahtlust nende abinõude siseturuga kokkusobivuse suhtes.
COMMENTS SUBMITTED BY INTERESTED THIRD PARTIES
KOLMANDATE HUVITATUD ISIKUTE MÄRKUSED
All interested third parties which submitted observations on the decision to open the formal investigation procedure agreed with the arguments put forward in that decision.
Kõik huvitatud kolmandad isikud, kes saatsid märkusi ametliku uurimismenetluse algatamise otsuse kohta, nõustusid väidetega, mis selles otsuses olid esitatud.
Furthermore they indicated that they had suffered damage as a result of the illegal aid granted to AGVO, EVO and PAKHUIZEN (loss of clients and revenues) and urged the Commission to take the necessary steps to forbid the aid and seek its recovery.
Lisaks osutasid nad sellele, et AGVO-le, EVO-le ja PAKHUIZENile antud ebaseadusliku abi tulemusena olid nad kahju kannatanud (klientide ja tulude kaotamine) ning palusid komisjonil astuda vajalikke samme abi keelamiseks ja tagasinõudmiseks.
EAFPA stresses that the aid measures at issue distort the market and calls on the Commission to forbid the aid and to seek its recovery.
EAFPA rõhutab, et kõnealused abimeetmed moonutavad turgu, ning kutsub komisjoni üles abi keelama ja tagasi nõudma.
As complainant, NOVA supports the Commission’s Decision to open a formal investigation.
Kaebuse esitajana toetab NOVA komisjoni ametliku uurimismenetluse algatamise otsust.
It considers it important to ensure transparency in the auction market and to guarantee a level playing field.
Ta peab tähtsaks läbipaistvuse ja võrdsete tingimuste tagamist oksjoniturul.
It further calls on the Commission to adopt appropriate steps to ensure recovery of the aid which may be incompatible.
Peale selle kutsub ta komisjoni üles võtma asjakohaseid samme siseturuga kokkusobimatuks osutuda võiva abi tagasinõudmiseks.
Flanders Ship Repair explains that the effect of the State aid has been to attract shippers to Ostend.
Flanders Ship Repair selgitab, et riigiabi tõttu on lastisaatjad siirdunud Oostendesse.
This has led, according to Flanders Ship Repair, to a loss of revenue, since the shippers who have gone over to Ostend no longer had their ships repaired in Zeebrugge.
See on ettevõtte Flanders Ship Repair sõnul viinud tulude kahanemiseni, kuna Oostendesse üle läinud lastisaatjad ei lase enam oma laevu Zeebrugges remontida.
Flanders Ship Repair asks for a negative decision with recovery as well as for provisional measures.
Flanders Ship Repair palub abi tagasinõudmise otsuse tegemist ja ajutiste meetmete võtmist.
ZVP, an association of fish purchasers and processors on the Belgian East coast, states that the unlawful State aid, together with other advantages, has allowed the Ostend fish auction to artificially attract foreign vessels and vessels from Zeebrugge.
ZVP, kalaostjate ja -töötlejate liit Belgia idarannikul, teatab, et ebaseaduslik riigiabi koos teiste eelistega on Oostende kalaoksjonil võimaldanud kunstlikult ligi meelitada välismaa ja Zeebrugge laevu.
Moreover, through numerous interviews and press releases by local politicians and members of EVO’s Board of Directors (stating in particular that in Belgium there probably is room for only one fish auction, namely Oostende), doubts have been cast concerning the future of the Zeebrugse fish auction and consequently the surrounding business park.
Lisaks sellele, kohalike poliitikute ja EVO juhatuse liikmete arvukate intervjuude ja pressiavalduste kaudu (eriti välja tuues tõika, et Belgias ei ole ruumi rohkem kui ühele kalaoksjonile, nimelt Oostendele) on avaldatud kahtlusi Zeebrugge kalaoksjoni ja järelikult ümbritseva äripargi tuleviku suhtes.
This has resulted in loss of revenues and a decrease in, suspension or withdrawal of investments and marketing efforts.
See on kaasa toonud tulude kahanemise, investeeringute ja turustusmahtude vähenemise, peatumise või tühistamise.
ZVP also mentions that it has tried to make the local authorities aware of this problem, but without success.
ZVP märgib samuti, et ta on üritanud suurendada kohalike ametiasutuste teadlikkust seoses selle probleemiga, ent edutult.
Finally ZVP points out that EVO has — by using a ‘front’ and obtaining public funds — established a filleting company, called Ostend Filleting Factory, which is also engaging in unfair competition.
Lõpuks juhib ZVP tähelepanu sellele, et EVO on variisiku kaudu ja tänu riiklikele vahenditele asutanud fileerimisettevõtte nimega Ostend Filleting Factory, mis on samuti seotud ebaausa konkurentsiga.
Grimsby Fish Market, a UK fish auction, indicates that around 2005/06, EVO started to buy fish straight from Icelandic fishermen at (high) fixed prices and sold by Dutch auction in Ostend, frequently at lower prices, and concludes that these losses have been paid for by public money.
Grimsby kalaturg, mis on Ühendkuningriigi kalaoksjon, osutab sellele, et umbes aastatel 2005–2006 alustas EVO kala ostmist otse Islandi kaluritelt (kõrgete) fikseeritud hindadega ja viis selle kala oksjonile Oostendesse, sageli madalamate hindadega, ning lõpetab järeldusega, et need kahjud maksti kinni riikliku rahaga.
Grimsby Fish Market urges an audit of EVO’s accounts to investigate the means by which the Icelandic fish supplies were financed and the losses incurred by EVO as a result of such sales methods.
Grimsby kalaturg nõuab EVO rahastamiskontode auditeerimist, et uurida Islandi kalaga varustamise finantseerimismeetodeid ja kahjusid, mida EVO oma müügimeetodite tõttu sai.
ZV AND EFC
ZV JA EFC
ZV and EFC draw the attention of the Commission on other possible unfair practices and State aid measures, namely the use by AGVO/EVO of the City’s staff, free of charge, and price guarantees granted by EVO and based on the auction price at the Zeebrugse Visveiling.
ZV ja EFC juhivad komisjoni tähelepanu võimalikele muudele ebaausatele tegevustele ja riigiabi meetmetele, nimelt linnavalitsuse töötajate tasuta kasutamine AGVO ja EVO poolt ning hinnagarantiid, mille andis EVO ja mis põhinesid Zeebrugse Visveilingi oksjonihinnal.
They further explain why in their view competition is distorted and trade between Member States affected.
Lisaks selgitavad nad, miks on konkurents ja kaubandus liikmesriikide vahel nende arvates moonutatud.
They also draw the attention of the Commission on additional injection of capital into AGVO and in EVO (through remission of debts).
Samuti juhivad nad komisjoni tähelepanu kapitali lisapaigutustele AGVOsse ja EVOsse (võlgade kustutamise kaudu).
Finally they note that the Belgian authorities have not suspended the aid.
Lõpuks märgivad nad, et Belgia ametiasutused ei ole abi andmist peatanud.