WRITTEN QUESTION E-0016/00 by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission. News concerning the rules on state aid to undertakings in deprived urban areas.
C 280 E/158 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3. 10. 2000 (2000/C 280 E/179) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0014/00 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (19 January 2000) Subject: Breach of Directive 89/391/EEC on the improvement of health and safety of workers Following complaints to the responsible Greek and Community bodies from the Works Council of Andersen (Consulting) B. P. M. Hellas S. A. in Greece that the company was in breach of the basic provisions of Framework Directive 89/391/EEC (1), the competent Greek authorities carried out an investigation which established that such breaches had occurred. In view of the fact that the company has failed to resolve the problems and that no review has been carried out, as requested by the Works Council, will the Commission say what measures it will take to ensure effective monitoring and compliance with the provisions of the Directive in order to protect the health and safety of workers employed by the company concerned? (1) OJ L 183, 29. 6. 1989, p. 1. Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission (1 March 2000) In accordance with Article 4 of the Council Framework Directive 89/391/EEC of 12 June 1989, on the introduction of measures to improve the safety and health of workers at work (1), it is the responsibility of the Member States to ensure adequate control and supervision of the national provisions implemented by this directive. Consequently, any possible breach of the provisions of Directive 89/391/EEC must be brought to the attention of the Greek authorities. In this particular case these authorities must be informed once again by the parties concerned if the health and safety conditions at work are not remedied in the company in question. The Commission would not hesitate to take necessary action if it was given reliable information that the Greek authorities were not monitoring the implementation of the provisions of Directive 89/391/EEC. (1) OJ L 183, 29. 6. 1989. (2000/C 280 E/180) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0016/00 by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission (19 January 2000) Subject: News concerning the rules on state aid to undertakings in deprived urban areas With reference to OJ Notice No 97/C 146/08 and to my previous question P-3945/97 (1), can the Commission say: 1. which European countries have taken advantage of the above regulation to grant aid to undertakings in deprived urban areas? 2. whether there are any surveys or reports on this matter? 3. whether there any examples of good practice in this regard? (1) OJ C 187, 16. 6. 1998, p. 99. 3. 10. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 280 E/159 Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (23 February 2000) Only France has so far granted aid under the Guidelines on State aid for undertakings in deprived urban areas (1). With regard to the other questions, the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answers to her written questions P-2628/97 (2), P-3945/97 (3) and E-173/99 (4). The Guidelines in question lay down the criteria on the basis of which the Commission examines whether State aid to deprived urban areas is compatible with the common market, but they do not require Member States to grant such aid. The fact that these Guidelines have been applied to only a limited extent means that it is not at present possible to draw up a report or produce a list of good practices. (1) OJ C 146, 14. 5. 1997. (2) OJ C 82, 17. 3. 1998. (3) OJ C 18, 16. 6. 1998. (4) OJ C 341, 29. 11. 1999. (2000/C 280 E/181) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0020/00 by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Council (20 January 2000) Subject: The outermost regions and the allocation of structural funds The programming of structural funds in the Autonomous Region of the Azores for the period 1994 to 1999 envisaged structural support worth PTE 149 200 075 million or EUR 744 207 million, equivalent to EUR 124 034 million per year, according to the latest rescheduling in 1999. Although it already reflects the upward adjustment resulting from the relevant deflator, the amount is still quoted at current prices, since it is difficult to update it to 1999 prices. In a letter to the Portuguese authorities dated 1 July 1999 the Commission proposed an indicative allocation of EUR 757 million for the Autonomous Region of the Azores for the period 2000 to 2006, equivalent to EUR 108 million per year. This represents a substantial reduction, much more than the apparent reduction of EUR 16 million, in that the value for 1994-1999 has not been updated for 1999 and does not take account of the rise in revenue in both the Azores and the Community. This Commission proposal blatantly contradicts all the promises and statements made by the Commission with regard to the outermost regions, in particular: 1. 2. 3. that the resources would be concentrated in the poorest regions; that these regions would receive more amounts per year; that the outermost regions in particular would benefit. Apparently insensitive to the reality of numbers, the Commission continues to claim that the reform of the structural funds has brought more resources to all the outermost regions. Does the Council not consider it necessary to carry out a thorough review of the impact of the reform of Community policies in the poorest and most isolated regions, such as the Autonomous Region of the Azores, in particular in the context of the application of Article 299(2) of the Treaty?