WRITTEN QUESTION E-1966/99 by Gerhard Hager (NI) to the Commission. EU project Natura 2000 ‐ Repercussions on the situation of individuals under private law.
Date: 1999-11-05
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Austria, EU programme, Lower Austria, competence of the Member States, directive (EU), economic consequence, environmental protection, land and buildings, ownership, protected area

C 225 E/38

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

8.8.2000

In order to grasp the extent of the problem of the often illegal use of non-Community drivers,
3. and 4.
the Commission has asked the Member States to provide an overview of the diverse social, labour and
transport rules applied by them in this area. Obviously this is only a first step in exploring possible ways
to address this issue. Once the Commission has gained an overview of the relevant rules and details
determining current practice, it will consider what action must be taken.

5. to 7.
It cannot be excluded that the use of non-Community drivers on Community vehicles in intra-
Community transport may have distorting effects on road haulage competition. The issue has to be
analysed and solutions must be sought, as pointed out above, by preference within the framework of the
diverse social, labour and transport rules applied in this area.

(1) OJ C 67, 10.3.1999.

(2000/C 225 E/038)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1966/99

by Gerhard Hager (NI) to the Commission

(5 November 1999)

Subject: EU project (cid:145)Natura 2000(cid:146) (cid:129) Repercussions on the situation of individuals under private law

Various Austrian federal states have registered certain areas of their territory under the EU project (cid:145)Natura
2000(cid:146) including the Federal State of Lower Austria which has registered 31,63 % of its total surface area.
Under this project, the Member States are obliged to ensure compliance with the directive on the
preservation of bird life and the (cid:145)flora-fauna-habitat directive(cid:146) in the designated areas. In drawing up the
corresponding lists of designated areas, most landowners were neither asked nor informed even though
this entails major restrictions on property rights and use.

In view of this can the Commission answer the following questions:

1. What department or agency in the EU is responsible for the implementation of this project?

2. Which areas have been registered for the (cid:145)Natura 2000(cid:146) project in the various Austrian federal states

and in Lower Austria in particular?

3. What are the consequences for landowners? Can the Commission provide detailed information in this

regard?

4. What legal provisions are there for owners of land in (cid:145)Natura 2000(cid:146) registered areas to opt out of the

project?

5. Can a local authority which has registered under the (cid:145)Natura 2000(cid:146) project withdraw such a

registration?

6. What are the consequences for landowners in such cases?

7. Are the actions of the Federal State of Lower Austria in registering certain areas under the (cid:145)Natura

2000(cid:146) project without the prior consent of landowners compatible with current EU law?

8.

9.

If not, what does the Commission intend to do about these illegal actions? To what extent are
landowners, who are affected by the actions of their Federal State of Lower Austria which are
incompatible with EU law, obliged to comply with the provisions restricting property rights contained
in the abovementioned directives?

If so, is the Commission of the opinion that these actions are at least questionable in the light of the
provisions of the ECHR (restrictions on the rights of property owners, independence of authorities
interfering with the rights of individuals under private law)?

8.8.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 225 E/39

Answer given by Mrs Wallstr(cid:246)m on behalf of the Commission

(7 December 1999)

Within the Commission the environment Directorate general oversees the implementation of the Natura
2000 network.

Natura 2000, the European ecological network of special areas of conservation, involves sites designated
under two environmental directives. Special protection areas (SPAs) are designated by Member States under
Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds (1), and the Commission is
notified. Under Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild
fauna and flora (2) Member States propose sites of Community interest (SCIs) and later designate them.

The identification and selection of sites as well as definition of their boundaries for inclusion in Natura
2000 is exclusively a scientific exercise. Single landowners do not therefore have a role in this exercise. All
data on the sites identified in Austria were formally communicated to the Commission by the Austrian
authorities in application of the relevant criteria. There is no mechanism foreseen in the directives for the
withdrawal of designated or nominated sites by Member States. However, should objections on a scientific
basis occur, these should be brought to the attention of the Commission by the Member State.

Seventy-three sites have been formally designated as SPAs in Austria, of which nineteen are in Lower
Austria, and 113 sites have been formally proposed as SCIs in Austria, of which nineteen are in Lower
Austria. For details on each site the Honourable Member is kindly invited to address the Austrian
authorities.

As far as detailed information on consequences for landowners is concerned,
it should be noted that
directives are binding as to the result to be achieved, but leave to the national authorities the choice of
form and methods. The Natura 2000 network is based on the principle of subsidiarity. It is up to the
Member States to determine how best to conserve the sites that are identified as being of Community
importance. The consultation of landowners is not mentioned in the directives and is a matter for the
Austrian authorities to decide. Any decision on whether or not to consult and its consequences, including
the fulfilment of international treaties, is up to them.

The inclusion of areas in Natura 2000 is not intended as a block on human activities. The emphasis is on
ensuring that human activities are sustainable and not damaging to the conservation values. Management
plans, involving owners and users, can be a valuable tool in addressing this objective.

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.
(2) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

(2000/C 225 E/039)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1968/99

by Piia-Noora Kauppi (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(5 November 1999)

Subject: Definition of peat in the Directive on the taxation of energy products

In its proposal for a Council Directive restructuring the Community framework for the taxation of energy
products (COM(97) 0030 (cid:129) C4-0155/97 (cid:129) 97/0111(CNS)) (1), the Commission also deals with the
taxation of peat. In Finland, for example, peat bogs are an important natural resource, and the turf squares
cut out from them cover some 7 % of Finland(cid:146)s energy requirement. Some 6 500 people derive their
livelihood either directly or indirectly from peat production. As yet, peat has not been classified as a
renewable energy source like wood. In fact, peat is a renewable natural resource comparable with wood,
with a longer cycle of renewal.

The use of peat is essential if we are seeking to use renewable natural resources in energy production.
Without the co-use of peat, wood-burning boilers could not be sufficiently productive and would not be
profitable. Peat is only used in local energy production, and thus has no influence on the European internal
market.