WRITTEN QUESTION P-1386/99

by Johannes Blokland (EDD) to the Commission

(1 September 1999)

Subject: Heerlen-Aachen cross-border industrial estate and the Habitats Directive

1. Is the Commission aware that the cross-border industrial estate between Aachen (Germany) and Heerlen (the Netherlands) is in receipt of subsidies from a number of European Union funds including Rechar, the ERDF and Interreg?

2. Is the Commission aware that the activities carried out at the industrial estate, which started in November 1998, are a threat to the hamster (Cricetus cricetus) which is protected by the Habitats Directive (L 1758)?

3. Can the Commission say why, when it provided aid under these regional funds, it took no account of the provisions of the Habitats Directive? Is this true of all the other projects financed by the funds in question?

4. In future is the Commission prepared to do everything in its power to avoid promoting activities which are in contravention of European legislation? If so, what action will it take?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(5 October 1999)

1. The Aachen/Heerlen cross-border industrial estate receives Community aid from the European Regional Development Fund under Objective 2 for Dutch Limburg and the Rechar and Interreg II A Community Initiatives for Nordrhein-Westfalen and the Meuse-Rhein Euregio (Germany/Netherlands/Belgium) respectively.

2. The Commission has been informed of the start of the work. It has repeatedly asked the national authorities to react to the complaints received concerning possible infringements of Council Directive 79/0409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds(1). After examining the latest official reactions received, the Commission has started work on preparing the infringement proceedings.

In letters of 6 and 8 July 1999 to the Dutch and German authorities respectively, the Commission asked them to suspend all Community aid under Objective 2 for Dutch Limburg and under Rechar for Nordrhein-Westfalen. The aid under Interreg II A was not suspended, as it concerns only studies and management.

3. Under Council Regulation (EC) 3193/94 of 19 December 1994 amending Regulation (EEC) 2052/88 on the tasks of the Structural Funds and their effectiveness and on coordination of their activities between themselves and with the operations of the European Investment Bank and the other existing financial instruments, and Regulation (EEC) 4253/88 implementing Regulation (EEC) 2052/88(2), all Commission decisions approving programmes under the Structural Funds must mention the need to comply with the Treaties and with Community policies, including environment policy.

The management of Community programmes is largely decentralised: the national authorities are responsible for choosing projects.

4. For the 2000-2006 programming period, Article 12 of Council Regulation (EC) 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds(3) also makes it obligatory to comply with Community policies. Moreover, under Article 8 of that Regulation, Community measures must be adopted in the framework of the partnership between the Commission and the Member State and the authorities and bodies designated by the Member State as being the most representative at national,

regional and local or other level, in order to promote inter alia sustainable development, through the integration of environmental protection and improvement requirements.

The new Regulation also provides for a whole series of measures to prevent infringements, including strategic environmental assessments of regional development plans and programmes (detailed ex ante evaluation covering strict compliance with environmental obligations and impact requirements), the use of environmental indicators, the introduction of stricter monitoring and a mid-term environmental evaluation.

5. Lastly, if prevention is not enough, Article 39 of the new Regulation lays down that where a Member State has not dealt with an irregularity detected in the implementation of a project the Commission may suspend the interim payments in question and, after having received the Member State's comments, make any appropriate financial corrections.

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.

(2) OJ L 337, 24.12.1994.

(3) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.