WRITTEN QUESTION E-0566/00 by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission. Implications of asymmetrical legal position of ownership.
C 46 E/14 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 13. 2. 2001 The Commission is currently updating the above report and is, of course, ready to be of further assistance to the Honourable Member, should he be interested to obtain more precise information on the subject. Statistics relating to legal acts adopted by the Community (CELEX Data Base) ü 1995-1999 1995 38 1996 79 1997 122 1998 70 1999 78 Total 1995-1999 387 Statistics relating to technical regulations notified within the framework of Directive 83/189/EEC/Directive 98/34/EC ü 1995-1999 Notifications Member States Belgium Denmark Germany Greece Spain France Ireland Italy Luxembourg The Netherlands Austria Portugal Finland Sweden United Kingdom 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 Total 1995-1999 26 36 92 12 25 61 1 31 1 43 25 5 17 5 59 17 28 88 16 19 41 4 27 0 62 61 19 34 34 73 59 40 99 12 35 51 3 31 0 341 106 7 22 23 71 900 50 55 76 11 24 47 1 32 2 122 69 11 23 30 51 604 20 43 85 17 31 54 4 25 1 128 69 6 24 35 49 591 172 202 440 68 134 254 13 146 4 696 330 48 120 127 303 3 057 Total (15) 439 523 (1) 28 February 1995-III/2185-EN/final-Experience acquired in the framework of Directive 83/189/EEC. (2001/C 46 E/017) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0566/00 by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission (29 February 2000) Subject: Implications of asymmetrical legal position of ownership In what sectors of the EU economy is it still the case that an asymmetrical legal position concerning ownership still exists, in other words, where it is possible for a state-owned company in one Member State to buy a private company in another, but where it is impossible for a private company to enter the market of the state-owned company? Is this still the case of the French electricity market? What measures is the Commission taking to open up those markets it indicates? Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission (19 May 2000) The Commission does not have at its disposal the necessary data to give the Honorable Member an exhaustive answer on all the asymmetrical legal positions of ownership in all sectors of the economy. 13. 2. 2001 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 46 E/15 As a general point, the Commission would note that the presence of state enterprises in certain sectors of economic activity is a matter solely for the Member States, within the limits of the rules imposed by the EC Treaty and of the policies liberalising certain economic sectors at Community level. The electricity sector is regulated by Parliament and Council Directive 96/92/EC of 19 December 1996 concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity (1). The Directive does not regulate the ownership of electricity companies, but lays down the rules relating to the organisation and functioning of the electricity sector and access to the market. Nevertheless, the Commission follows the issue of mergers and acquisitions in the electricity sector very closely. Where these have a Community aspect, they will be dealt with under the Merger Regulation (Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 of 21 December 1989 on the control of concentrations between undertakings) (2). (1) OJ L 27, 30. 1. 1997. (2) OJ L 395, 30. 12. 1989; as last amended by OJ L 40, 13. 2. 1998. (2001/C 46 E/018) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0570/00 by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Council (2 March 2000) Subject: Extension of qualified majority voting Will the Council please indicate which Member States proposed an extension of qualified majority voting and in which areas during the last two Intergovernmental Conferences, which were agreed and which Member States were opposed to such extension? Reply (10 July 2000) The Council would like to remind the Honourable Member that the Intergovernmental Conference is a temporary forum, composed of representatives of the Governments of the Member States and separate from the Council. The Council positions adopted by the Member States in the IGC. is not, therefore, entitled to answer questions relating to the proceedings of the IGC or (Directorate-General As the Honourable Member will be aware, extension of qualified majority voting is a recurrent topic of discussion at Intergovernmental Conferences and is making headway as the Treaties evolve. With regard to the progress made in Maastricht, the Council would refer to a study carried out by the European Parliament Secretariat for Research, Political and Institutional Affairs Division) in January 1996. As regards the progress made in Amsterdam, the Council would point out that it was agreed that meetings of the Preparatory Group of representatives of the Governments of the Member States should be attended by two Members of the European Parliament, as observers, who could voice the European Parliamentís views on all issues under discussion and who would receive the relevant documen- tation. This was also intended to keep Members of the European Parliament better informed about the course of proceedings and the actual results achieved. For the current IGC, the same arrangements apply. The Honourable Member is therefore sure to be informed of progress at the Conference, and particularly of positions stated on extension of qualified majority voting, by the European Parliament observers