WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1310/98 by José GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL to the Commission. EURO 1999
21. 10. 98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 323/123 evidence that the fanaticism cultivated by the Turkish authorities is bearing fruit, while they do nothing to protect the monuments of the minorities who have the courage to live on their territory. Is the Commission familiar with this matter and what measures will it take to prompt Turkey into action and punish those guilty of this outrage? Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (25 May 1998) The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the reply it gave to Oral Question H-425/98 by Mr Papakyriazis during question time at Parliamentís May 1998 part-session (1). (1) Debates of the Parliament (May 1998). (98/C 323/189) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1310/98 by Jose· Garc ·a-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission (29 April 1998) Subject: EURO 1999 As a result of the Pact for Stability and Growth adopted by the Amsterdam European Council in June 1997, the Member Statesí medium-term budgetary objective will be to achieve ápositions close to balance or in surplusí. If the Member States continue their budgetary adjustments in subsequent years, their public finances will be in the best position to tackle the budgetary consequences of a possible downturn in the economy. But what does the Commission think would be the current situation in Germany if the Stability Pact had been applied during the period 1992-1997? Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission (2 June 1998) The stability and growth pact is constituted by a resolution of the European Council of 7 June 1997 (1) and Council Regulation (EC) No 1466/97 of 7 July 1997 on the strengthening of the surveillance of budgetary positions and the surveillance and coordination of economic policies (2), and Council Regulation (EC) No 1467 of 7 July 1997 on speeding up and clarifying the implementation of the excessive deficit procedure (2). The pact aims at fiscal discipline in the economic and monetary union (EMU) thus creating the appropriate stability conditions for sustained growth. It provides a powerful system of incentives for a Member State not to incur an excessive deficit and to correct it rapidly if such a situation should occur. In 1992, Germany had a general government deficit of 2. 6% of gross domestic product (GDP), and in 1993 the deficit was 3. 2% of GDP. This situation led to a Council decision of 26 September 1994 on the existence of an excessive deficit in Germany (Article 104c(6) of the EC Treaty). The decision was abrogated in July 1995 › with the 1994 deficit having fallen to 2. 4% › but reintroduced in June 1996, as the 1995 deficit had risen to 3. 3%. In the period covered by the Honourable Memberís question, i. e. 1992 to 1997, Germany budgetary policy was mainly geared towards convergence, i. e. to correct the excessive deficit situation and thus to meet the 104c of the EC Treaty, which deal with sanctions, did not apply during stage two of EMU. (1) OJ C 236, 2. 8. 1997. (2) OJ L 209, 2. 8. 1997