WRITTEN QUESTION E-0815/03

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

(17 March 2003)

Subject: Incorrect application of the habitats directive in Zeeland

The province of Zeeland has made out a case for building a container terminal (WCT Westerschelde Container Terminal) for maritime and inland shipping in the port area of Vlissingen-Oost. In order to build this terminal the promoter Zeeland Seaports needs approximately 20 million m3 of infill sand, to be extracted from the North Sea. The Ministry of Transport and Public Works has therefore launched an environmental impact assessment.

On 21 February 2003 the Council of State ruled that the WCT plans were incompatible with certain provisions based on, or contained in, the habitats directive, because in the regional plan review adopted by the Provincial States a 141,72-hectare nature area (with a pilot function in environmental development) would become seaport territory.

It is claimed that the policy decision violates the rules, because the use of agricultural land as natural compensation for the construction of the WCT is not equivalent to compensation in a wet area outside the dike.

The nature area where the projected WCT would be located, which includes the fossil beach De Kaloot, should be conserved, given that the building of the WCT on this land is incompatible with Article 6(4) of the habitats directive.

The Council of State has temporarily suspended the implementation of the WCT plans.

Does the Commission agree that, until the procedure is complete, all parallel activities (EIA and application for a licence to extract sand for the WCT) should be suspended?

Does the Commission intend to take steps to prevent this threatened violation of the habitats directive?

Does the Commission intend to look more carefully at the natural compensation measures envisaged, inter alia as regards drylands being used as compensation for wetlands?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(5 May 2003)

The Commission has received two complaints about the construction of the Westerschelde Container Terminal (WCT) near Vlissingen. The complaints question the compatibility of the proposed WCT construction with the Nature Protection Directives: Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds(1) (Birds Directive) and Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora(2) (Habitats Directive).

The Westerschelde has been designated by the Netherlands as a Special Protection Area (SPA) under the Birds Directive and has been put forward as a proposed Site of Community Importance (pSCI) under the Habitats Directive.

The Commission is currently investigating the complaints. In this respect, Article 6(3) and 6(4) of the Habitats Directive seem relevant. According to Article 6(3), a plan or project that is likely to have significant effects on the site must be subject to an appropriate assessment of its implications for the site. If there are negative implications for the site, and if the plan or project, in the absence of alternative solutions, must be carried out for imperative reasons of overriding public interest, appropriate compensatory measures must be taken according to Article 6(4). The Commission will take the necessary steps to see to it that the relevant provisions of both Directives are complied with.

The Commission is further aware of a ruling of the Dutch Council of State (Raad van State) in this context of 21 February 2003. However, the Commission is currently not in a position to comment on the consequences of this ruling on the parallel activities mentioned by the Honourable Member.

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.

(2) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.