WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3272/98 by Kyösti VIRRANKOSKI Designation of Natura 2000 areas in Finland
Date: 1998-10-30
Institutions: European Parliament, VIRRANKOSKI
Subjects: EU Member State, EU programme, Finland, environmental protection, infringement procedure (EU), protected area, protected species, protection of animal life, protection of plant life, wildlife

C 289/32

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

11.10.1999

(1999/C 289/043)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3272/98

by Kyösti Virrankoski (ELDR) to the Commission

(30 October 1998)

Subject: Designation of Natura 2000 areas in Finland

The Finnish Government has adopted a decision on the areas to be notified to the Commission under the
Natura 2000 programme. Many of them are controversial, and appeals against the government’s decision are
therefore pending before the Supreme Administrative Court.

Does the Commission intend to consider and confirm the designation of the areas for inclusion in the Natura
2000 programme for Finland + including even those areas concerning which appeals have been lodged +
before the Supreme Administrative Court hands down its decision? To put it another way, does the
Commission care whether the people of Finland have been treated lawfully in this regard or not?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(7 December 1998)

The list of selected sites of Community importance for Natura 2000 is set up in a step-by-step procedure,
under which each Member State first proposes a national list of sites on the basis of the criteria set out in
Annex III to Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild
fauna and flora (1). This list should have been transmitted to the Commission by 10 June 1995. The
Commission then had three years, i.e. up to 10 June 1998 to establish a Community list based on the national
lists. It follows from the Directive that the Commission can adopt the final Community list only after receiving
the final version of the national list of a Member State.

The Commission will take into account all the sites proposed by Finland as soon as they are officially notified.

It can be noted that infringement proceedings under Article 169 of the EC Treaty are in progress against
several Member States including Finland.

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

(1999/C 289/044)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3273/98

by Kyösti Virrankoski (ELDR) to the Commission

(30 October 1998)

Subject: Use of indexation appropriations for Structural Funds

At the Edinburgh summit the breakdown of funding from the Structural Funds among the Member States was
agreed. As the breakdown was expressed in monetary terms on the basis of the funding available for the first
year of the programme, the loss of value caused by inflation is corrected by means of indexation
appropriations.

However, the Finnish Government is proposing to the Finnish Parliament in the budget for next year that
Finland should not take up its share of the indexation appropriations unless the required national counterpart
funding is provided from a source other than the Finnish State.

1. Which Member States have already during the past programming period waived part of the structural

funding or indexation appropriations allocated to them?

2. Which Member States have announced that they will not accept basic funding from the Structural Funds

or the indexation appropriations linked to them?