WRITTEN QUESTION E-2275/99 by Vittorio Sgarbi (PPE-DE) to the Commission. European rules on amusement arcades.
8. 8. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 225 E/83 With regard to non-legislative measures, the Commission would refer to the Daphne initiative it launched in 1997; this has now been replaced by the Community action programme Daphne (2000-2004) operational since 1 January 2000. The aim of the programme is to ensure a high level of protection of physical and mental health by protecting children, young people and women against violence (including violence in the form of sexual exploitation and abuse) by preventing violence and by providing support for the victims of violence in order to prevent future exposure to violence. It should be noted that the Community action programme is open to the associated countries of central Europe, including Romania, a country referred to by the Honourable Member. (2000/C 225 E/083) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2275/99 by Vittorio Sgarbi (PPE-DE) to the Commission (13 December 1999) Subject: European rules on amusement arcades At present, there are considerable disparities between the various Member States with regard to national rules governing games of chance. In some countries such as Italy there is a total ban on the issuing of licences with the result that demand far outstrips the very limited supply. All of Italyís neighbours, however, including Slovenia which is close to becoming a member of the Union, have more liberal laws on games of chance and have numerous casinos and amusement arcades. Consequently there are many Italians who travel abroad in order to frequent these places. These activities produce revenue of thousands of billions of lire for the local authorities or states where the games of chance take place, revenue which is lost to the gamblersí regions of origin because of the absence of adequate facilities. Much of this revenue comes from the pockets of Italians who are obliged to travel abroad to frequent amusement arcades. At European level, efforts have always been made to standardise Member Statesí rules liable to generate appreciable differences in the socio-economic field, while account should also be taken of the huge turnover produced by gaming houses. Can the Commission answer the following: ü is it intending to draw up a Community directive that will provide equal opportunities for business- interested bodies and clients with regard to the opening, operation and frequenting of men, amusement arcades? ü if not, does it think it would be appropriate to take steps to remove the legal disparities and eliminate any possible competition based on clear differences in laws, which severely penalise Italy vis-à-vis neighbouring countries? ü furthermore, does it think it appropriate to issue a Community directive on the subject designed to standardise the laws in force in the various Member States as soon as possible? Answer by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission (17 January 2000) The Commission would like to draw the honourable Memberís attention to the negative aspects of games of chance, which include the active encouragement for players to spend money and a potential for damaging personal and social consequences. For this reason, all Member States regulate games of chance with the intention of preventing the stimulation of demand in this sector, fighting crime and fraud, and ensuring that games of chance serve a charitable, sporting or cultural purpose, rather than personal or commercial profit. In view of the moral, religious and cultural concerns surrounding these activities, the Member States therefore tend to impose a limit on their number. C 225 E/84 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 8. 8. 2000 Although the limitations on games of chance prevent certain economic operators from gaining access to this field of activity, their underlying principles were found by the Court of Justice to be compatible with the principle of the freedom to provide services set out in Article 49 (formerly Article 59) of the EC Treaty (see the judgment of 21 September 1999 in case C-124/97). The Court found that the considerations of public interest mentioned above were sufficient justification for leaving the Member States to decide which restrictive measures were necessary to provide protection on their territory. It is the Commissionís view that the various systems of regulation and national control exercised in the different Member States are all based on public interest grounds and follow the same principles, which are compatible with the Community principle of the freedom to provide services. In this context and in the absence of substantial differences between the laws of the various Member States, the Commission has no intention of drafting any secondary legislation on games of chance. (2000/C 225 E/084) WRITTEN QUESTION P-2278/99 by Carlos Westendorp y Cabeza (PSE) to the Commission Subject: Aid to the shipbuilding industry (24 November 1999) The European shipbuilding sector is in serious difficulty. One of the EUís priorities should be to secure the future of a competitive shipbuilding industry which will contribute to social and economic development by maintaining a certain level of employment in a number of regions, many of which have a high level of unemployment. In its report to the Council on the situation of shipbuilding in the world, the Commission acknowledges that South Koreaís public aid scheme for shipbuilding is destabilising the world market in that sector. With a view to planning measures which will remedy this state of affairs, has the Commission quantified the amount of such aid? Council Regulation (EC) No 1540/98 (1) of 29 June 1998 lays down new rules on state aid to the shipbuilding sector up to December 2000. Is the Commission planning to extend the provision of such aid to European production beyond that date as a precautionary measure whilst it pursues its investigation into shipbuilding aid in South Korea? (1) OJ L 202, 18. 7. 1998, p. 1. Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (20 December 1999) The Commission fully shares the Honourable Memberís concerns about the difficult market situation, which is characterised by very low prices and serious over-capacity caused by Korea. So far as alleged subsidisation of Korean shipbuilding is concerned, at this stage it is not possible to quantify the possible forms of public support being used to assist Korean yards. More information is required. The Commission will continue its investigations and present its findings to the Council. As regards the Communityís aid regime, Council Regulation (EC) No 1540/98 of 29 June 1998 establish- ing new rules on aid to shipbuilding, provides for a range of various aids to shipbuilding up until 2003. The only aids that are due to be abolished at the end of 2000 are contract-related operating aids. There are no plans at this stage to prolong such aids. In accordance with Article 12 of the Regulation, the Commission is obliged to keep the market situation under regular review and will, if appropriate, propose measures to address the situation if it is found that Community yards are suffering injury from unfair competition practices. The Commissionís recent report to the Council (1) was the first such report