WRITTEN QUESTION E-1216/00

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL), Alexander de Roo (Verts/ALE), Johannes Blokland (EDD), Dorette Corbey (PSE) and Theodorus Bouwman (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(14 April 2000)

Subject: Reopening of the Iron Rhine railway link through De Meinweg nature conservation area on the Dutch-German border

1. Can the Commission confirm that in late March 2000 Belgium, the Netherlands and Germany agreed to re-open the Iron Rhine, the former rail link between the port of Antwerp and the Ruhr area in Germany?

2. Is the Commission aware that the rail link referred to in question 1 passes through De Meinweg nature conservation areas between the cities of Roermond and Mönchengladbach, and that this is one of the reasons why this single-track, non-electrified link was abandoned long ago by rail traffic and why it cannot be reused without being repaired?

3. Does the Commission recall its answer to Written Question P-1875/99(1) by Mr De Roo in which it said that the likely significant effect on De Meinweg needed to be assessed in the light of directives 92/43/EC(2) and 79/409/EEC(3), but that there was no indication that these directives had already been infringed, and accordingly it would ask the Dutch authorities for information? What information has now been received?

4. Can the Commission confirm that the decision referred to in question 1 anticipates an environmental impact report to be drawn up in the Netherlands, and therefore that the agreement cannot actually entail any obligations on the part of the Netherlands?

5. What procedure is being followed for identifying the environmental impact on the German part of the route, and at what point will the Commission be able to assess whether the directives have been infringed on that part of the route?

6. Is your assessment determined to a significant extent by whether a transport link which infringes the directives is temporary or permanent in nature, and is it acceptable for the route in question to be used pending the construction of a different route?

7. Is the Commission prepared to encourage the route of the Iron Rhine to be shifted as soon as possible from the currently agreed route to the route from Venlo to Mönchengladbach, for example by constructing the missing section along the E3/34 motorway between the Belgian railway network near Turnhout and the Dutch network near Eindhoven, which could also be used for passenger transport?

8. Is the Commission also prepared, pending the availability of new infrastructure, to encourage transport via the existing Belgian-Dutch goods link between Visé and Aachen, so that the Meinweg district can be permanently spared?

(1) OJ C 170 E, 20.6.2000, p. 113.

(2) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.

(3) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979, p. 1.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(30 May 2000)

As stated in the reply to the Written Question P-1875/99 by Mr de Roo(1) the Commission has sent a letter to the Netherlands requesting information about the application of Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds(2) and Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild flora and fauna(3) with regard to the Meinweg. The Meinweg has been designated as a special protection area (SPA) within the meaning of Directive 79/409/EEC and has been proposed as an area of special Community interest (SCI) within the meaning of Directive 92/43/EEC as well.

In its letter the Commission asked the Netherlands for information on whether an appropriate assessment as defined in Article 6(3) of Directive 92/43/EEC has been made concerning the effects that the project could have on the Meinweg and if so, what are the results.

The Commission has not yet received a reply from the Netherlands in time and it is now overdue. Therefore it has sent a further letter to the Netherlands requesting a reply as soon as possible.

Until the Commission has been informed about the results of the assessment it is not able to judge the applicability of Directive 79/409/EEC and Directive 92/43/EEC, in particular Article 6(4) of the last mentioned Directive, to the project in question.

The application of Directive 79/409/EEC and Directive 92/43/EEC is primarily the responsibility of the Member State concerned. The Commission's only responsibility is to check whether the Member State has respected the requirements of those Directives.

The requirements of Article 6(4) of Directive 92/43/EEC, such as the assessment of alternative routes instead of the temporary or permanent re-opening of the existing railway line through the Meinweg, only apply if the results of the assessment under Article 6(3) of the Directive show that the project will have significant effects on the Meinweg. At the moment the Commission has no indication that action has to be taken as suggested in the question in advance of receiving the reply from the Netherlands. It has not yet received any indication that an infringement of Directive 79/409/EEC or Directive 92/43/EEC has already taken place.

(1) OJ C 170 E, 20.6.2000.

(2) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.

(3) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.