WRITTEN QUESTION P-2791/99 by Luís Queiró (UEN) to the Commission. German contravention of competition rules.
8. 8. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 225 E/207 Proper and objective assessment of research projects is normally made with the help of experts who are specialists in the research field concerned. Can the Commission tell me whether the experts assessing the quality of the research projects on each of the disciplines concerned (homeopathy, osteopathy, etc. ) have already been appointed? If not, can the Commission tell me when they will be, and what objective criteria and what procedure will be employed in appointing these experts? Can the Commission tell me how many projects it has received, and the disciplines concerned? Is the budget earmarked for these projects adequate? Answer given by Mr Busquin on behalf of the Commission (28 January 2000) In response to the call for proposals (1) for the specific research programme Quality of life and manage- ment of living resourcesí (2), some 600 projects of a generic nature were submitted by 15 November 1999, three of which related to non-conventional medecines. The proposals will be evaluated by independent experts in January 2000. As stated in the Vade Mecum for Experts Taking Part in Proposal Evaluation (www. cordis. lu/life), each proposal will be evaluated by at least 4 independent experts. All the experts are selected from the Commissionís áexpertí database, which is set up through a call for applications. They are chosen for their scientific expertise in the areas of activity of the work programme. The names of the experts taking part in the evaluation will be published once all the decisions relating to the call for proposals have been taken. A budget of € 86 million has been allocated for these generic activities. Given that the overall Community contribution requested for the 600 proposals submitted will be over € 900 million, the selection rate will probably be approximately 1 out of 10. (1) OJ C 64, 6. 3. 1999. (2) OJ L 64, 12. 3. 1999. (2000/C 225 E/236) WRITTEN QUESTION P-2791/99 by Luís Queiró (UEN) to the Commission (7 January 2000) Subject: German contravention of competition rules In the last few weeks we have witnessed two instances of government intervention in the economic activity of an EU Member State, namely Germany. The first intervention was to prevent the imminent bankruptcy of the Philip Holzmann company, and saw public funding to the value of DEM 257 million (EUR 127,8 million) being granted. The second intervention came when the German government opposed the hostile take-over bid for the Mannesmann company by the British Vodafone Air Touch company, and called for the establishment of rules to impeded such operations, on the grounds that there is a need to prevent áculture clashesí between differently-conceived models of capitalism. 1. Do the German governmentís interventions constitute market operations? 2. Were the interventions made without prior authorisation from the Commission? C 225 E/208 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 8. 8. 2000 Are Community competition rules, which the Commission is responsible for promoting and 3. defending, being flaunted or not? Is firm and punctilious Commission intervention called for here, as it was when the Portuguese 4. government opposed the Champalimaud/Santander Central Hispano agreement? Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (1 February 2000) Vodafone Airtouchís hostile take-over bid for the German company Mannesmann will be assessed in accordance with Community competition rules and specifically under Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/ 89 of 21 December 1989 on the control of concentrations between undertakings (1) as amended, the merger regulation. This is the rule for all merger cases dealt with by the Commission. The merger regulation would allow the German government to block the merger between Vodafone Airtouch and Mannesmann if there were reasons of public security, plurality of the media and prudential rules. However, if the German government were to find any other public interest being infringed by the operation, this would have to be communicated to the Commission. After a preliminary examination of the notified aid to Holzmann on the basis of the Guidelines on State Aid for Rescuing and Restructuring Firms in Difficulty the Commission found that the aid raised doubts as to its compatibility with the common market. Therefore, on 18 January 2000 the Commission initiated proceedings in order to launch an in-depth investigation of the aid measures. The Honourable Member can be assured that the case is being carefully scrutinised. (1) OJ L 395, 30. 12. 1989, as amended OJ L 40, 13. 2. 1998. (2000/C 225 E/237) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2792/99 by Ulpu Iivari (PSE) to the Commission (18 January 2000) Subject: Targeting of development cooperation projects for implementation in Nicaragua Some evaluations of development cooperation projects in Nicaragua funded by EU Member States have in addition to the poorest sections of the population, projects also drawn attention to the fact that, benefited individuals close to the government and businesses owned by such people. Moreover, projects have been concentrated in areas where support for the current government was strongest, irrespective of whether there was a greater need for them elsewhere. Have similar problems occurred with projects funded by the EU in Nicaragua and if so, what has the Commission done to overcome them? Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission (4 February 2000) Commission-run cooperation projects in Nicaragua are subject to rigorous identification procedures to determine priority areas for intervention consistent with the needs identified and the objectives set. Hence Community aid benefits the local population of intervention areas that meet the criteria and objectives of the projects. To ensure that these principles are properly applied and that the projects are run as proposed and agreed, the Commissionís system for major projects includes European experts as part of a manage- ment unit whose mission is to ensure that Community aid is implemented correctly. Moreover, the existence of the delegation in Managua makes it easier to monitor activities and ensure increased control on the spot. This system has enabled the Commission to approach the Government of Nicaragua on a number of occasions to ensure full compliance with the terms of the financing conventions signed with the Commission