You are on page 1of 2

2. 10.

98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 304/17

The German Government sought to propose the repeal of those two instruments in 1993/94, but its proposal was
not adopted following opposition from the Upper House of Parliament and has not resurfaced since.

There can be no denying that the legislation in question, which has no counterpart elsewhere in the Community,
might not be compatible with the principles of the single market. For, businesses are unable to adopt a
pan-European promotional and advertising strategy in so far as they would have to rethink radically the content
and nature of their advertising in order to comply with legislation in one of the largest markets in the Community.
The Commission has received numerous complaints in this connection (see, for example, the answer to Written
Question No 64/98 by Mr de Vries (1)).

In the absence of any Community harmonisation in this matter, the Commission is examining the possible
restrictive effects and the proportionality of the German legislation as part of its investigations into the
aforementioned complaints and in the light of the case law of the Court.

(1) See page 26.

(98/C 304/24) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0017/98
by Jaak Vandemeulebroucke (ARE) to the Commission
(29 January 1998)

Subject: Language use in the Official Journal

Official Journal L 328 of 28 November 1997 contains a list of contracting authorities that are subject to the
agreement concerning the award of public service contracts. On page 10, a list relating to Belgium appears only
in French.

The Commission is aware of my concern with language use. Can I be informed why the above list appeared only
in French? Am I to conclude that Dutch and German speakers are not subject to this procurement legislation?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission
(20 March 1998)

The Commission is conducting a detailed investigation of the problem raised by the Honourable Member and
will inform him of the outcome as soon as possible.

(98/C 304/25) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0018/98
by Klaus Lukas (NI) to the Commission
(29 January 1998)

Subject: Cost of the Commission representation in Vienna

The Commission’s reply to question E-3151/97 (1) only partially answered the questions concerning expenditure
on the Commission representation in Vienna.

An answer to the following questions would therefore be appreciated:

How many more staff does the Commission representation in Vienna now have than it had before Austria’s
accession?

Are there any plans for further increases in its staff? If so, how many more are to be recruited?

How much bigger is the head of the representation’s office than that of President Santer?
C 304/18 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 2. 10. 98

How often are conferences held at the representation with 100 people in attendance?

The Commission itself says that the figures on numbers of visitors to the Commission representation in Vienna
are estimates. If the visitors are therefore not counted exactly, how did the Commission arrive at the impressive
figure of more than 10 000 people in a period of 12 months?

What was the degree of utilization of the storage space at the Commission representation in Hoyosgasse?

What is the degree of utilization of the storage space at the Commission representation in Kärntnerringhof?

(1) OJ C 134, 30.4.1998, p. 77.

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission
(11 March 1998)

The staff in the Commission representation in Vienna has increased by four people.

In principle there will be no further increases in staff, but during the second half of 1998, during Austria’s
European Union Presidency, two additional people will be employed on a limited basis only for the second half
of 1998.

Considering the particularity of the room in which the head of representation works, a comparison with the
offices at headquarters is not possible. Indeed, the diverse configurations of buildings occupied by the
Commission in Brussels also prevent any meaningful comparison being made between them. The Community
runs approximately 120 delegations in third countries and 23 representations and antennae in Member States, all
with different architectural layouts.

Four events with 100 people and more were held at the representation in Vienna.

In a three week period this year which was chosen at random, precise records were kept of all callers to the
Representation. The number of visitors, both individuals and groups came to 680. A simple extrapolation would
indicate an annual total of well in excess of 10,000 visitors to the Representation.

The storage space in Hoyogasse was not only completely used, but in addition, several meters of bookshelves
had to be installed in the corridors to store brochures, printed information material and so on.

Approximately 95% of the space dedicated to storage at the representation in Kärntnerringhof is being used.

(98/C 304/26) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0022/98
by Christian Rovsing (PPE) to the Commission
(29 January 1998)

Subject: Exclusive rights in the gas market

The state owned natural gas company ‘Dansk Naturgas A/S’ has legal exclusive rights to export, transmit and
store natural gas in Denmark.

Are these exclusive rights, in the Commission’s opinion, in accordance with the competition rules of the Treaty?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission
(9 March 1998)

The Commission cannot comment on the legality of exclusive rights in the abstract. Certain exclusive rights may
be justified if their removal makes it impossible for undertakings charged with the operation of services of a
general economic interest to fulfil particular tasks imposed upon them by legal measures.