Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-01-18-Speech-2-118"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000118.4.2-118"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
In the important debate on competition this morning, I expressed my views on Mr Langen’s report on the implementation in 1998 of the sixth Steel Aid Code.
Just as the Court of Justice recognised in its order of 3 May 1996, the iron and steel industry is particularly sensitive to disturbances to its competitive operation. Establishing a system of aids to this sector intended to ensure the survival of successful firms was therefore justifiable, even though Article 4(c), of the ECSC Treaty prohibited any sort of state aid to the steel industry. This, indeed, is the purpose of the sixth Steel Aid Code.
At the same time, it is, of course, essential to avoid any disturbance of competition conditions or of the markets, hence the importance of regulating such aid. It is therefore essential to continue to restrict state aid to research and development, environmental protection and aid granted in the event of plant closure.
In the same way, it is vital for Member States to fulfil their obligation to report to the Commission on the aid granted to their steel undertakings, as stipulated under Article 7 of the Steel Aid Code. The Commission suggests that Member States submit their reports within a time limit of two months following the end of each six-month period or, at least, annually, without the need for reminders.
Like the rapporteur, I am pleased with the Commission report, but I did deplore the fact that the report did not cover every aspect of the aid. Although the Steel Aid Code is expressed in a very clear way, the Commission has, on a number of occasions, authorised aid for the steel industry even though such aid did not fall within the categories set out in the code. In the interests of equality, there are grounds to either apply the Steel Aid Code strictly or modify the Code if the Commission wishes to authorise types of aid other than those legally acceptable at the moment.
Finally, we have the problem of the consequences of the expiry of the ECSC Treaty. The aid system must effectively be continued beyond 2002. My feeling in this respect is that only a Council Regulation can provide the necessary legal certainty and ensure an official ban on any aid not covered by the code.
For all these reasons I voted in favour of the Langen report, and I now await the Commission’s response to our requests and demands."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples