WRITTEN QUESTION E-3595/00

by Alexander de Roo (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(22 November 2000)

Subject: Extension of Adamas harbour, Island of Milos, Cyclades, Greece

By joint order 69269 of 30 March 1998 the Minister of the Environment, Regional Planning and Public Works and the Minister of the Merchant Maríne of Greece approved the above projected works. In November 1999 the Greek Government decided to go ahead with the work which was described as harbour works in order to benefit from Community funding. In fact the works are fundamentally transforming the urban and regional planning of the island by embankment of the entire length of the marine parade where the road runs along the beach, thus creating carriageways and additional areas allowing various bars and restaurants to set up tables beside the sea.

The environmental impact assessment does not seem to have been carried out in accordance with the relevant law (Law 1650/1986, Directive 85/337/EEC(1) and joint ministerial orders Nos 69269/5387/1990). The Council of State, to which an appeal was made on 11 November 1999 for suspension of the works, rejected the appeal on 18 January 2000 under a recently adopted provision, Article 35 of Law 2721/1999; the President of the Fifth Chamber of the Council of State merely invoked the concept of public interest, without giving any reasons, and thus authorised resumption of the works(2). An appeal to annul the administration's decision was also lodged on 8 November 1999. When considering this appeal the Council of State deemed it admissible and thus contradicted itself by casting doubt on the public-interest argument advanced in its judgment of 18 January 2000. However, the appeal has been pending since it was lodged, and this has enabled the promoters of the works to complete them.

The possibility of widespread application of the above provision under Law 2721/1999 is dangerously restricting Greek citizens' right to temporary protection by the courts and is likely to allow the completion of works financed from Community funds that will have irreversible environmental consequences.

Can the Commission consider the above question and take the necessary measures with regard to the Greek authorities to ensure compliance with Community law, particularly the rules on environmental impact assessments?

Does the Commission not consider that there is a need to ask the Greek authorities to refund the Community funds granted for this project, if Community rules are not being complied with?

What, in the Commission's view, would be the risks caused by widespread application of the above provision under Law 2721/1999?

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985. The assessment provides no details of the works or environment affected, no assessment of the consequences in all their possible forms, no detail of proposed pollution prevention, reduction or compensation measures, no consideration of advantages and disadvantages, no justification according to purely environmental criteria of the solution chosen and no analysis of alternative solutions to protect the Bay of Milos and its eco-system, the second largest natural bay in the Mediterranean. The Island of Milos is already severely affected by mineral extraction activities and plans to extend such activities, which are seriously affecting the environment (see Written Question E-0318/2000). The inclusion of the region on the west coast of Milos in the Natura 2000 network, under Directive 92/43/EEC, published in OJ L 206, 22.7.1992) is being held up by the local authorities who are mainly responsible for the works concerned.

(2) The main reason for the works is to enlarge the area available for restaurants and bars.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(8 February 2001)

Member States do not regularly inform the Commission on the application of Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985, as amended by Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997, on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment(1). Consequently, and in response to the Honourable Member's question, the Commission will contact the Greek authorities to ascertain whether all procedures laid down in the legislation have indeed been carried out.

Where the Commission finds non-compliance with Community law, it may require national authorities to remove all spending on the project in question from the statement of expenditure bringing to a close the 1994-1999 Multifund Operational Programme for the South Aegean.

As regards Article 35 of Law 2721/99, the Commission would point out that, as things currently stand, since this is a national law detailing the procedures for third parties to take a case to court, it does not come under the Community's jurisdiction.

(1) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997.