Conclusion

Chapter
Part of the Legal Issues of Services of General Interest book series (LEGAL)

Abstract

In this concluding chapter, it will be examined to what extent the update of the Monti-Kroes package has shed more light on the relationship between the Treaty provisions on State aid and Services of General Economic Interest. It will be argued that the Commission has succeeded to make considerable progress in its update and modernisation of the ‘Altmark-Monti-Kroes Package’. Although a couple of issues remain to be settled, it is apparent from the analysis carried out in the present volume that many other problems are solved. By so doing, the Commission has contributed to the development of the EU approach to SGEI. Although the EU edifice for SGEI is far from finished, some important bricks of this building are identified in the updated ‘Altmark-Monti-Kroes package’. Competition and principles of good governance should play a key role. If these values are not satisfactorily adhered to by the Member States, the Commission is likely not to approve their measures to finance particular SGEI. As a result, the updated ‘Altmark-Monti-Kroes Package’ should be regarded as an important development, which could, eventually, lead to convergence of the national policies for the provision of SGEI.

Keywords

Member State Public Procurement Commission Decision Treaty Provision European Court 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Bartosch A (2007) Social housing and European state aid control. ECLR 28:563–570Google Scholar
  2. Costamanga F (2012) The internal market and the welfare state;anything new after Lisbon? In: Trybus M, Rubini L (eds) The Treaty of Lisbon and the future of European law and policy. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 381–397Google Scholar
  3. Fiedziuk N (2010) Towards a more refined economic approach to services of general economic interest. EPL 16(2):271–288Google Scholar
  4. Kamaris G (2012) The reform of EU state aid rules for services of general economic interest in times austerity, ECLR 33:55–60Google Scholar
  5. Karayigit M F (2009) Under the triangle rules of competition, state aid and public procurement: public undertakings entrusted with the operation of services of general economic interest. ECLR 30:542–564Google Scholar
  6. Koenig C, Paul J (2010) State aid screening of hospital funding exemplified by the German case. EStAL 4:755–770Google Scholar
  7. Krajewski M (2008) Providing legal clarity and securing policy space for public services through a legal framework for services of general economic interest: squaring the circle? EPL 14:377–398Google Scholar
  8. Sauter W (2012) The Altmark package II; new rules for state aid and the compensation of services of general economic interest. ECLR 33:307–313Google Scholar
  9. Sinnaeve A (2012) What’s new in SGEI in 2012? – an overview of the Commission’s SGEI package. EStAL 2:347–367Google Scholar
  10. Szyszczak E (2012a) Building a socioeconomic constitution;a fantastic object? Ford Int Law Jo 35:1364–1395Google Scholar
  11. Szyszczak E (2012b) Soft law and safe havens. In: Neergaard U, Szyszczak E, Van de Gronden JW, Krajewski M (eds) Social services of general interest in the EU. TMC Asser Press, The HagueGoogle Scholar
  12. van de Gronden JW, Rusu CS (2012) Services of general (economic) interest post Lisbon. In: Trybus M, Rubini L (eds) The Treaty of Lisbon and the future of European Law and policy. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 413–435Google Scholar

Copyright information

© T.M.C. Asser Press, the Hague, the Netherland, and the authors 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of International and EuropeanLaw Radboud University NijmegenNijmegenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations