WRITTEN QUESTION P-0498/00 by Luciana Sbarbati (ELDR) to the Commission. Measures to assist persons suffering from neurodegenerative diseases.
24. 10. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 303 E/199 The structure of the basic salaries of EIB staff is largely similar to that of Community officials and other servants. The breakdown is as follows: Basic salaries of the EIB (1998) Category Executive staff Administrative staff Management staff Minimum 1 891,48 3 715,03 7 466,13 (in euro) Maximum 4 950,88 10 651,64 14 610,10 These figures show that the ratio between the lowest and highest possible salaries is 1:7. 7, a difference considerably lower than the norm in the banking sector in Europe. Further, to date no member of the EIB management staff has received the maximum salary shown in the table. All salaries are subject to Community tax; the maximum rate is 45 % and the proceeds from it are paid into the Community budget. Certain factors peculiar to the EIB should be taken into account when assessing the above data: ü Unlike the other Union institutions, the Bankís Statute requires it to be self-financing and to cover its administrative costs out of the gains it makes as an intermediate bank. In other words, the EIB provides for its own operation without drawing on the budgetary resources of the Community or of the Member States. ü Also unlike the other institutions the employment relationship between the Bank and its staff is governed by contract rather than by conditions of service; in addition, the Bank still works a 40- hour week. These two factors combined with the banking nature of EIB activities, which is reflected in the preponderance of administrative and management staff the staff complement), should be taken into account when assessing the average salaries of Bank staff. (55 % of ü Finally, in accordance with banking custom, the salaries of Bank staff are established on an individual basis and form part of the employer-employee relationship. That said, staff are familiar with the minimum and maximum salary for their category. To conclude, the amount actually allocated to the remuneration of Bank staff (€88,5 million out of the €126 359 million which goes on staff costs) is 30 % less than the figure quoted by the Honourable Member. Finally, the Commission would point out that the EIB is an independent institution owned directly by the Member States and operating under guidelines established by its Governors. For any further clarification on the remuneration of the officials of the EIB, the Governors or the Bank should be approached direct. (1) Profit and Loss account, EIB 1998 Annual Report, p. 74. As the figures cited by the Honourable Member are for 1998, the figures in this answer refer to the same year, which is the last year for which the accounts have been certified. (2000/C 303 E/227) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0498/00 by Luciana Sbarbati (ELDR) to the Commission (17 February 2000) Subject: Measures to assist persons suffering from neurodegenerative diseases As people start to live longer, age-related health problems are generally increasing. Enabling the elderly to retain their independence for as long as possible, through preventive treatment, assistance and structures to provide information on diseases, is one of the priorities for the European Unionís social policy. C 303 E/200 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 24. 10. 2000 Alzheimerís disease effects 5 % of persons over the age of 65 in Europe and there is still no treatment able rapidly to halt the neurodegenerative process that occurs. Will the Commission say what procedure it intends to introduce and what criteria it will adopt for the use of funds under the new budget heading B3-4307N, which is designed to improve the quality of life of those suffering from neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimerís disease and related conditions, and of those assisting them in a non-professional capacity? Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission (22 March 2000) The Commission is aware of the implications that demographic factors, and in particular the ageing of the Community population, will have for society as a whole, and for health systems in particular. It underlined these consequences in its communication on the development of public health policy in the Commun- ity (1), which it also recognises in its forthcoming communication and proposal for a programme of action in the field of public health. Moreover, under the present Community action programme on health promotion, information, education and training, strategies aiming at improving older peopleís health have been developed as a priority issue. As a result of the ageing of the population, the number of people afflicted by Alzheimerís disease is bound to increase in the future, and the Commission is very much aware of the great suffering caused by this disease not only for the patients, but also for their families. The fact that neither proven treatments nor effective preventive measures are available for Alzheimerís disease further aggravates the situation, and at the same time limits the scope for action both at national and Community level. Budget line B3-4307 foresees activities aimed at improving the quality of life of patients suffering from neuro-degenerative diseases such as Alzheimerís, and of people who care for Alzheimer patients in a non- professional capacity. The Commission is presently in the process of examining the implications of implementing this budget line, including the implications for spending on other Community public health activities. Once this examination is completed, the Commission will transmit the result of its examination direct to the Honourable Member. (1) COM(98) 230 final. (2000/C 303 E/228) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0499/00 by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission (17 February 2000) Subject: Car price differentials Does the Commission consider that the substantially higher prices for cars in the UK are the result of concerted behaviour on behalf of car producers and/or distributers and thus should result in an early revision of the block exemption from competition rules under the existing regulation? If the Commission does not consider this to be the case, how does it explain the substantial and persistent difference in the price of new cars, well beyond the figure mentioned in the notice published by the Commission in connection with the regulation EEC 123/85 (1)? (1) OJ L 15, 18. 1. 1985, p. 16