WRITTEN QUESTION E-0915/02

by Stavros Xarchakos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(5 April 2002)

Subject: Construction of the Acropolis Museum

According to reports in the Greek press, there is considerable opposition in Greece to the Ministry of Culture's decision to build the Acropolis Museum at the Makriyannis site. It will be recalled that this project has been at the planning stage for the last 25 years (sic!) and that four competitions

have been held since 1976 (the first two in 1976 and 1979 were national, the other two international competitions) and still the matter is still unresolved. There are associations such as the Citizens' Movement that are opposed to the work on the grounds that the site earmarked for the purpose is an archaeological site where excavations have not yet been completed, as the finds in the area during recent work on the Athens Underground show.

A further problem is caused by the fact that one of the requirements in the recent competition is that visitors must be able to see the Parthenon sculptures in the new museum and the Parthenon itself on the Acropolis at the same time. The only way to achieve this is to raise the museum five metres above the listed von Weiler building which is located in the area and ignore all the restrictions imposed on this area in order to protect the Acropolis site. Under the exceptions allowed in the invitation to tender, the south side of the Museum would be 40 metres high, i.e. between 15 and 20 metres higher than the blocks of flats in the area, and would be an eyesore in this historic site.

However, the fourth competition in a row has also caused problems. After the failure to hold the third competition (an open international competition which failed owing to the opposition of scientific bodies and neighbours) the Ministry of Culture held the fourth competition which, as the press commented, was so lacking in transparency that many thought the contract was awarded directly to the winners. It should be pointed out that the winner of the competition was one of 20 architects and academics from all over the world who had written a letter five years ago to the Greek Government calling on it to reconsider its decision and reverse its decision to build a large museum at the Makyriannis site.

Is the Commission aware of the above issue, and what is its position? Is it directly or indirectly funding (through the CSF or Community initiatives and programmes) the construction of the museum in question? Are the Greek authorities obliged to notify it about all the stages of the project and the choices they make? Does it intend to look into the entire matter, and what measures does it intend to take to clarify this situation completely?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(14 May 2002)

Within the Community support framework for Greece during the programming period 2000-2006, the European Regional Development Fund co-finances structural interventions in the cultural sector. In particular, the operational programme (OP) on culture aims, amongst other things, to improve the building and technological infrastructure in existing museums as well as to create new ones including the Acropolis museum.

The Commission is informed that an invitation to tender concerning a study was published in August 2000 (restricted procedure following the Council Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992 relating to the co-ordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts(1)). The contract awarded to a consortium was signed in December 2001. In March 2002, the Central Archaeological Council approved unanimously the preliminary design and models submitted to it by the consortium. As such, the completion of the study is at its final stage.

Following the information received from the Greek authorities, the OP managing authority has not yet approved the Acropolis museum project. Nevertheless, in application of the principle of subsidiarity, the responsibility for the actions to be carried out lies entirely with the Member State. Clearly, the implementation of the project must be done in accordance with the legislation in force, and the managing authority is responsible for the supervision and follow up of the project.

(1) OJ L 209, 24.7.1992.