Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 2

C 297/58 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 15.10.

1999

The Commission would also inform the Honourable Member that it has received a letter from the Dominican
Republic informing it that banana production after the hurricane remains sufficient to supply the Community
market as planned.

(1) OJ L 47, 25.2.1993.

(1999/C 297/077) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3220/98


by Laura González Álvarez (GUE/NG)
and Pedro Marset Campos (GUE/NG) to the Commission

(26 October 1998)

Subject: Irregularities in the awarding of a construction contract in Cerceda, La Coruña (Galicia, Spain)

Sogama S.A. is a publicly-owned Galician company active in the field of environmental management set up by
the autonomous authorities as a means of carrying out their responsibilities in this field. In order to carry out
its activities, the company published an invitation to tender for the construction of a thermoelectric waste
treatment plant in the municipality of Cerceda (La Coruña) which will receive financial support from the
Community. The call for tender resulted in tenders from various companies. The initial selection process did
not result in the awarding of a contract. Subsequently, at some point not known to the unions, and without the
publication of any announcement, the contract was awarded to a company based outside the autonomous
community. Some important public offices, including the Galician Ombudsman, publicly criticised the
awarding of the contract since it appeared that the administrative rules laid down had not been complied with.
The regional authorities were even accused of having created the limited liability company in order to
circumvent control by public authorities.

Workers active in the sector have initiated legal proceedings in Spain through their Union representatives.

1. Since this construction project receives Community financial support, can the Commission call on the
competent authorities to initiate an investigation to look into the accusations levelled by Spanish trade unions?

2. Given that Galicia is among the European regions with the highest rates of unemployment, does the
Commission not think that European funds allocated to the abovementioned construction project would fulfil
their objective better if the companies concerned were based in Galicia or had factories there?

3. In what manner can the Commission intercede before the Spanish authorities in order to guarantee
compliance with Community legislation on the environment and, more specifically, with (a) Directive 91/156/
EEC (1) on waste, (b) Directive 85/337/EEC (2) on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private
projects on the environment and (c) Directive 90/313/EEC (3) on the freedom of access to information on the
environment.

4. As the guardian of the Treaties, to what extent does the Commission consider that workers employed by
Galician companies have been discriminated against by the awarding of the contract to a non Galician
company?

(1) OJ L 78, 26.3.1991, p. 32.


(2) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40.
(3) OJ L 158, 23.6.1990, p. 56.

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(14 January 1999)

1. On 7 May 1998, the Commission approved part-financing by the Cohesion Fund of the waste
management project in Galicia. This project involved the construction of the thermoelectric plant mentioned
by the Honourable Members.

The Commission was not aware of any irregularities in the award of the public contract referred to by the
Honourable Members, and it is difficult to deal with this case on the basis of the information provided. The
Commission would therefore ask the Honourable Members for more details on this matter in order to justify
15.10.1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 297/59

its making an approach to the Spanish Government in order to check whether there has been an infringement
of Community public procurement legislation. These details should focus on the following aspects: the statutes
of Sogama S.A. (the extent of the administration’s holding in the company, its management or administrative,
managerial or supervisory structures, the reason why this company was set up); any available documents
concerning the initial procedure which failed to produce a result (contract notice, invitation to tender,
specifications, evaluation report) and any information concerning possible irregularities which may have been
committed in the course of this procedure; and any information concerning the procedure by which the
contract was finally awarded, as well as any details on possible infringements of Community public
procurement legislation.

2. and 4. The Community Directives relating to the coordination of procedures for the award of public
service contracts (1) assist in the completion of the internal market through provisions aimed at ensuring
compliance with the principles of transparency, non-discrimination and equal treatment. It would be
incompatible with these principles, and with the EC Treaty itself, to establish any form of preferences,
including regional, which would favour certain tenderers over others.

3. Compliance with Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of
certain public and private projects on the environment (2) and Council Directive 91/156/EEC of 18 March
1991 amending Directive 75/442/EEC on waste (3), and with several other provisions concerning atmospheric
emissions, is a precondition for the adoption of decisions concerning the financing of waste management
projects under the Cohesion Fund. As regards Council Directive 90/313/EEC of 7 June 1990 on the freedom of
access to information on the environment in particular (4), the Commission is not aware of any infringements
having been committed.

(1) Directives 93/36/EEC, 93/37/EEC and 93/38/EEC of 14 June 1993 (OJ L 199, 9.8.1993), and Directive 92/50/EEC of
18 June 1992 (OJ L 209, 24.7.1992).
(2) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.
(3) OJ L 78, 26.3.1991.
(4) OJ L 158, 23.6.1990.

(1999/C 297/078) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3223/98


by Luigi Moretti (NI) to the Commission

(26 October 1998)

Subject: Radio broadcasting

The French authorities recently closed down a radio station for a day as a penalty for having broadcast more
foreign songs than the statutory limit.

Could the Commission state whether the legislation in question complies with the European rules on free
competition?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(11 December 1998)

French Law No 94/88 of 1 February 1994 amending Law No 86/1067 of 30 September 1986 on freedom of
communication stipulates that, with effect from 1 January 1996, sound broadcasting services authorised by
the Conseil superieur de l’audiovisuel (CSA) must broadcast, at ‘significant listening times’ (1), at least 40 % of
songs in French, half of which at least must be from ‘new talents or new productions’. The CSA checks
compliance with these quotas on a quarterly basis and is entitled to impose sanctions C ranging from a simple
warning to compulsory closure C on stations which fail to comply.

The Commission is aware that this obligation creates problems for a number of stations which, by their very
nature or by virtue of their programming decisions, regularly fail to meet the imposed quota. It has taken note
in the press of the successive sanctions imposed on the station referred to by the honourable Member.