WRITTEN QUESTION No. 456/98 by Elly PLOOIJ-VAN GORSEL to the Commission. Complaints concerning the construction of a dam in the River Ems
Date: 1998-02-27
Institutions: European Parliament, PLOOIJ-VAN GORSEL
Subjects: Lower Saxony, State aid, aid to industry, engineering structure, environmental protection, hydraulic works, restriction on competition, shipbuilding













EUR-Lex - 91998E0456 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91998E0456

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 456/98 by Elly PLOOIJ-VAN GORSEL to the Commission. Complaints concerning the construction of a dam in the River Ems  


Official Journal C 323 , 21/10/1998 P. 0038 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0456/98 by Elly Plooij-van Gorsel (ELDR) to the Commission (27 February 1998)Subject: Complaints concerning the construction of a dam in the River EmsIt appears from reports in the press that DG IV is investigating complaints about the construction of a DM 353 million dam in the River Ems in North Germany, directly on the border with The Netherlands at the entrance to the Dollard estuary. The ship-building firm of Meyer, based in Papenburg (Germany) has a direct interest in this, since the dam will raise the water level of the Ems, thus giving the large cruise ships built in its ship-yard full deep-water access to the open sea.1. Has the German Government yet reacted to the Commission's requests for clarification in response to complaints from (inter alia) the Nederlands Waddenvereniging (Netherlands Association for the Waddenzee region) concerning the impact of the building on the dam on nature and the environment in the Ems and Dollard, and the distortion of competition it will produce in favour of the Meyer shipyard in Papenburg?2. If not, can the Commission investigate whether the purpose of building a dam in the Ems in Germany is to protect against flooding, or rather to raise the water level of the Ems which directly benefits the Meyer shipyard of Papenburg?3. Is the Commission further aware that the dock for the Papenburg shipyard was enlarged with DM 15 million of government money, to enable cruise ships built by Meyer to turn better in the river?4. Does the Commission consider that pursuing these activities with government money conflicts with European rules of competition? If so, what action will the Commission take to prevent distortion of competition?Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission (2 April 1998)The Commission received a number of complaints concerning the construction of a barrier in the river Ems near the village of Gandersum in Lower Saxony (Germany). As set out by the Honourable Member the complainants claim that the financing of these works from public sources is to be considered as a state aid in favour of Meyer-Werft in Papenburg. A number of complaints deal as well with the presumed negative impact of the works on the environment and the potential violation of Community environmental law. The Commission therefore started investigations of the competition aspects and of the environmental aspects of the envisaged project.Concerning the alleged violation of state aid rules the German government informed the Commission with letters of 26 January 1998 and 16 February 1998 about the justification and the main components of the envisaged barrier. A first discussion between the German authorities and the Commission was held on 18 February 1998. The German government pointed out that the barrier was first of all needed for an improvement of flood protection in the adjoining area.As some questions are still open, the Commission is not yet able to take position whether the construction or certain parts of it are to be considered as state aid in the sense of Article 92 of the EC Treaty. The Commission will therefore continue investigations. In this context the current enlargement of the port of Papenburg will be addressed as well.As regards the possible infringement of environmental law, the complainants, at the request of the Commission, gave detailed information which is currently being assessed.