WRITTEN QUESTION E-2499/01

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(13 September 2001)

Subject: Purely domestic considerations in the development of Laarbruch airport in Germany on the border with the Netherlands

1. Is the Commission aware of plans to develop the former British military airbase at Laarbruch near Weeze (Germany, North Rhine Westphalia, Düsseldorf, Kleve) for use as a civilian airport?

2. Is the Commission aware that Laarbruch is close to the Dutch border and that the approach route to the landing and takeoff runway which lies in an East-West direction causes considerable nuisance to the village of Bergen (province of Limburg) and the De Hamert nature reserve on the Dutch side of the border?

3. Is the Commission also aware that in drafting these plans only the impact on the environment and economy on the German side of the border and the relevant German environmental standards have been considered so far and that the negative repercussions of the plan on the Dutch side of the border have been totally disregarded. Proximity to the border between the two countries has been used only as a means of propaganda to support the claim that the airport is a Euregional facility which would benefit the Dutch towns of Venlo and Nijmegen?

4. Can the Commission confirm that there are also plans to allow flights between 11 p.m. and midnight and between 5 and 6 a.m., which was not the case for the former military airbase or for regional airports in the Netherlands, as result of which those living in the area will find their sleep seriously disturbed?

5. What action can be taken to avoid an outdated approach of shifting environmental problems onto a neighbouring country and once again creating the impression that European cooperation does not help solve cross-border problems between two or more Member States?

6. What can the Commission do to ensure the democratic involvement of all interested parties and the proper weighing up of all the conflicting interests on either side of the Dutch-German border?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(12 November 2001)

1. Following information received from the German authorities, financial support from the Structural Funds for work related to the conversion of Weeze-Laarbruch airport has been provided through the Konver II programme for North Rhein-Westphalia during the 1994-1999 programming period, of which the overall purpose was to support economic diversification in regions

heavily dependent on the defence sector. Financial aid from the European Regional Development Fund for these measures amounts to 1,140,140, i.e. 26 % of their total public costs. However, the Structural Funds have not supported construction work on airport facilities at Weeze-Laarbruch, including runways, but measures concerning analyses on conversion of the airport and the construction of a business park.

2. The Commission is aware of the location of the airport and possible noise nuisances.

3. North Rhein-Westphalia's Ministry for Economic Affairs, Small Businesses, Energy and Transport, which is responsible for managing the Konver II programme, indicates that Dutch environmental authorities have been involved in the consideration of measures financed through the Structural Funds.

4. As stated by the Commission in its decision of 22 July 1998(1) on access to Karlstad airport, Member states may apply certain restrictive operational measures, such as night curfews, provided that such measures respect the provisions and procedures of articles 8 and 9 of Council Regulation (EEC) 2408/92(2) as well as comply with the principles of necessity and proportionality.

5. For projects with likely significant effects on the environment of another Member State, article 7 of Directive 85/337/EEC as amended by Directive 97/11/EC(3) on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (EIA) provides for information and consultation arrangements between the Member States concerned regarding inter alia, measures envisaged to reduce or eliminate such effects. Where the EIA Directive applies, noise nuisance including its transboundary dimension, would need to be studied, amongst other environmental impacts, in the context of the environmental report and taken into account in the development consent procedure.

6. The Commission is of the opinion that the EIA Directive gives sufficient assurances for proper involvement of all the parties concerned.

(1) OJ L 233, 20.8.1998, p. 25-31.

(2) OJ L 240, 24.8.1992, p. 8.

(3) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997, p. 5.