92000E0137

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0137/00

by Gerhard Hager (NI) to the Commission

(27 January 2000)

Subject: Rescue flight contracts with the main association of Austrian social insurance institutions

Current practice in Austria with regard to rescue flights is giving cause for considerable concern regarding its conformity with EU legislation. Although authorisation from the civil aviation authorities is needed to carry out secondary flights, that is to say transport flights between hospitals, it emerges that companies operating such flights, which have now been transferred away from the Austrian Ministry of the Interior, do not hold such authorisation. In addition, the main association of Austrian social security institutions has simply concluded an indefinite contract with the Federal Ministry of the Interior and another private body under which they alone can benefit from direct settlement of flight costs through social insurance.

1. Is the Commission aware of the above?

2. Does the Commission take the view that the main association of Austrian social insurance institutions is required to issue a Europe-wide invitation to tender for such contracts under the relevant European legislation, in particular Directives 92/50/EEC(1) and 89/665/EEC(2).

3. If so what steps will the Commission now take in response to this infringement of EU legislation?

4. If not, what is the Commission's justification for this view?

5. Does the Commission consider that the exempting of firms with government links from civil aviation authorisation requirements constitutes an inadmissible distortion of competition?

6. If so, what steps will the Commission take?

7. If not, what is the Commission's justification for this view?

(1) OJ L 209, 24.7.1992, p. 1.

(2) OJ L 395, 30.12.1989, p. 33.

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(9 March 2000)

The Commission has received several complaints addressing similar facts. These complaints concern the issue of transport of sick people by road. The Commission is investigating the procurement practice and will have to determine if the procurement rules have been infringed.

When it comes to the legal assessment of the case the Commission is bound by the conclusions of the Court of justice in the case Tögel(1). In its ruling of 24 September 1998, the Court stated that the rescue and patient transport accompanied by a paramedic falls under Council Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992 relating to the coordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts (Annex 1A, category 2, and Annex 1B, category 25). When the threshold fixed in the Directive is reached, the rescue and patient transport accompanied by a paramedic has therefore to be published on European level. The Court however did not pronounce on the question which Austrian authority is under the obligation to publish.

The Commission will investigate the facts described by the Honourable Member. It will have to determine at a given moment if contracts concluded between the Federation of Austrian Social Insurance Entities (Hauptverband der Österreichischen Sozialversicherungsträger) and the ministry of Interior for the operation of air transport for the sick and injured needs to be published.

(1) Case C-76/97 of 24.9.1998, Walter Tögel against Niederösterreichische Gebietskrankenkasse, preliminary ruling.