WRITTEN QUESTION E-2248/99 by Karl von Wogau (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Licensing of private ambulance services.
1. 8. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 219 E/129 Answer given by Mrs Schreyer on behalf of the Commission (19 January 2000) The Honourable Member is informed that the cost of translation and interpretation as estimated by the European institutions in the 1999 budget amounts to approximately € 686 million. The breakdown by institution is as follows: Institution Translation Interpretation Parliament Council Commission Court of Justice Court of Auditors Economic and Social Committee (ESC) Committee of the Regions (COR) Common organisational structure (ESC/COR) Total 103,1 131,0 218,7 37,6 8,2 0 0 24,1 522,7 61,1 46,0 42,5 4,9 0,4 6,0 2,3 0 163,2 (in million Euro) Total 164,2 177,0 261,2 42,5 8,6 6,0 2,3 24,1 685,9 The impact of adding one or more new languages to the existing official languages will be dealt with in a supplementary answer once estimates are available for all the European institutions. (2000/C 219 E/161) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2248/99 by Karl von Wogau (PPE-DE) to the Commission (1 December 1999) Subject: Licensing of private ambulance services In a judgment of 24 September 1998, the European Court of Justice decided that the transport of sick and injured persons was a service in respect of which invitations to tender must be issued. As a result, all Länder laws on rescue services should be amended. However, such amendments have not yet been made. In the meantime, the Higher Administrative Court of Lower Saxony (ref: 12 L 4158/97) has decided that áambulances used for the professional transport of sick or injured persons outside the scope of the public rescue service are not rescue service vehicles within the meaning of § 52(3)(4) of the Road Traffic Licensing Regulations (StVZO) and are therefore not permitted to operate on the public highway if equipped with warning lights emitting flashing blue light (rotating lights)í. Voluntary organisations, who are the private operatorsí traditional competitors, hold every licence issued in all German Länder in respect of emergency rescue services and so can keep the blue light on their ambulances, whilst private firms, who are in any case unable to operate emergency rescue services owing to the administrative monopoly in that area, cannot keep their blue lights. This has resulted in a substantial drop in the number of contracts awarded to private operators, because their vehicles cannot be equipped with blue lights for use in emergencies. Is the Commission aware that in Germany private firms are being refused licences to transport sick and injured persons (not to mention to provide emergency services) on the grounds that the demand for ambulances is already met and the issuing of further licences would push up costs? Does it take the view that this practice results in preferential treatment for old-established operators and prevents competition? C 219 E/130 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 1. 8. 2000 Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission (27 January 2000) it should first of all be stated that, with In answering the question put by the Honourable Member, reference to the European Court of Justice judgment on 24 September 1998 in case C-76/97 (Tögel/ Niederösterreichische Gebietskrankenkasse), ambulance and rescue services come within Annex I A, Category No 25, to Directive 92/50EEC (1) relating to the award of public service contracts where the value of the transport service is greater than the value of the rescue and medical treatment carried out during transport. In such cases, EU-wide invitations to tender must be issued for ambulance services when the threshold set by the Directive has been reached. The contract must then be awarded to the lowest priced or economically most advantageous bid. There are no other award criteria. The Commission has recently received several complaints from private passenger transport companies on this matter. The complaints relate to the situation in a number of Länder. According to reports, in some Länder ambulance and rescue services which should be made public are not being put out to tender. The Commission has looked into this matter and is currently examining procurement procedures in the Länder concerned. It is also investigating whether the laws on rescue services in these Länder comply with the provisions of Directive 92/50/EEC. Once these investigations have been completed, the Commission will decide which, if any, of the measures available to it under Article 226 (ex Article 169) of the EC Treaty it will apply in order to counter any infringements of the EC Treaty which may arise in the award of contracts for ambulance and rescue services. (1) OJ L 209, 24. 7. 1992. (2000/C 219 E/162) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2259/99 by Theresa Villiers (PPE-DE) to the Commission (13 December 1999) Subject: Tax discussions The European Commissionís 1998 proposal to update EU provisions on mutual assistance among tax authorities in debt recovery (COM(98) 364) is making its way through the Council of Ministers. Press reports have suggested that the Financial Questions Working Group in the Council is in broad agreement over the nature of the information that authorities should present when they seek assistance. Reports have also mentioned a proposal from the Spanish Government to create a working party to discuss these issues. In the interests of transparency, will the Commission comment on these initiatives and provide Parliament with details of the work being undertaken by the Working Group and an indication of the Commissionís own views on these issues? Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission (21 December 1999) The Commission proposal (1) for a Parliament and Council directive amending Council Directive 76/308/ EEC on mutual assistance for the recovery of, inter alia, fiscal claims, has had its first reading in the Parliament under the co-decision procedure. Arising from the Parliamentís suggestions, the Commission presented an amended proposal (2). This proposal is currently being discussed in the appropriate Council working group, and as soon as an agreement is reached, it will be sent back to the Parliament for its second reading. The ad hoc working party on tax fraud, which has been established on the basis of a proposal by the Spanish government, is not responsible for discussing this proposal