WRITTEN QUESTION E-0525/00

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(28 February 2000)

Subject: Iron Rhine

In answer to Question No E-2381/99(1) concerning the Iron Rhine Mrs de Palacio states that the Belgium-Netherlands arbitration treaty and the Belgium-Netherlands treaties deriving therefrom do not specify the precise location of the railway track inside this area (the Sittard canton). According to the Commission, this means that the Belgian Federation and the Netherlands will have to agree mldr on the manner in which the right of way is made effective.

The Commission's position ignores the actual situation on the ground. The right of way was already made effective between 1869 and 1879 with the construction of the very first cross-border railway link in Europe. Consequently, the precise location of the railway track has been clearly specified since that time.

Can the Commission answer the following:

1. Does it appreciate that its position on agreement having to be reached on the manner in which the right of way is made effective ignores the actual situation on the ground since the right of way was made effective between 1869 and 1879 and the precise location of the railway track inside this area (the Sittard canton) is thus clearly specified?

2. If so, does the Commission regard the Iron Rhine that was constructed between 1869 and 1879 as the realisation of the right of way to which reference is made in the Belgium-Netherlands arbitration treaty and the Belgium-Netherlands treaties deriving therefrom?

3. If not, does the Commission then not regard the Iron Rhine constructed between 1869 and 1879 as the realisation of the right of way to which reference is made in the Belgium-Netherlands arbitration treaty and the Belgium-Netherlands treaties deriving therefrom? What arguments does the Commission advance for not regarding the Iron Rhine constructed between 1869 and 1879 as the realisation of the right of way to which reference is made in the Belgium-Netherlands arbitration treaty and the Belgium-Netherlands treaties deriving therefrom?

(1) OJ C 280 E, 3.10.2000, p. 35.

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(2 May 2000)

In reply to the Honourable Member's written question E-2381/99(1), the Commission indicated that as far as it knows, the precise location of the railway track inside the area of the Sittard Canton was not specified in the Treaties. Of course it cannot deny that a railway line has been built and exists in reality.

However, it is not for the Commission to direct the Dutch government to implement any non-EC Treaty obligation it may have entered into. Nor is it for the Commission to decide whether the terms of such obligations have been met.

The Commission understands that representatives of the Belgian, German and Dutch Governments formed a trilateral working party to discuss the reopening of the route. Following meetings of that working party last year, ministers from the three Member States concerned agreed last December 1999 that a further cross-border study of the definitive route should be carried out, to examine in particular the environmental and other constraints on its development. This is necessary since the Dutch section of the route passes through areas which are environmentally sensitive and are covered by the provisions of Council Directive 92/43/CEE of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and wild fauna and flora(2).

The Commission is currently considering a formal request from the Belgian authorities to extend the Community funds already committed to the project to cover this study.

(1) OJ C 280 E, 3.10.2000, p. 35.

(2) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.