WRITTEN QUESTION P-0065/00 by Carlo Fatuzzo (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Milan airport system: Malpensa ‐ Linate ‐ Orio al Serio.
Date: 2000-01-18
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Italy, airline, airport, competence of the Member States, competition, environmental impact, organisation of transport

21.11.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 330 E/73

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(3 March 2000)

The information currently available to the Commission indicates that there is a total ban on night flights at
Paris Orly, and a ban on night flights with an exemption for postal cargo flights at Munich and Berlin
Tegel. There is a limitation on the number of movements during the night at Munich (outside curfew
hours), London Heathrow/Gatwick/Stansted, Manchester, and Stockholm. In addition, noisy aircraft are
banned during the night at a significant number of airports including Frankfurt, D(cid:252)sseldorf, London
Heathrow/Gatwick/Stansted, Manchester, Madrid-Barajas, Paris Charles de Gaulle, and Amsterdam.

In its recently adopted communication on air transport and environment (cid:129) Towards meeting the
challenges of sustainable development (1) the Commission launched a debate on the appropriateness of
establishing a Community framework for decision-making procedures in the field of environmental
operating restrictions at Community airports.

As set out in this communication, the Commission is not convinced that uniform and binding rules on
operating restrictions, such as a ban on night flights, applicable at all Community airports would provide
the best-balanced solution for the noise problems at a particular airport. Such decisions should continue to
be taken at local
level. However, the Commission is of the opinion that there should be a common
framework for the procedures leading to these decisions. Such a framework could include obligatory
consultation of all concerned including people living around airports, sufficient time for operators to adapt
to new restrictions, and a common basis for assessing the environmental effectiveness of the operational
restrictions.

(1) COM(1999) 640 final.

(2000/C 330 E/080)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0065/00

by Carlo Fatuzzo (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(18 January 2000)

Subject: Milan airport system: Malpensa (cid:129) Linate (cid:129) Orio al Serio

The European Community has included the Milan airport system in its list of category 1 airports and has
specified that the system comprises the airports of Milan Linate, Milan Malpensa and Bergamo Orio al Serio
(shown in the destinations table under the official name (cid:145)Milan-Orio International Airport(cid:146)).

Malpensa airport is one of the priority projects that have been established at European level and financed
by 500 billion lire in EIB assistance.

In addition, the development plan for the Milan airport system, which was approved at government level
and authorised by the Community some time ago, gave the airport of Bergamo Orio al Serio a prominent
role as the east Lombardy pole, and significant sums have been invested in it (100 billion lire by the
operating company alone over the last three years).

The ban on the transfer of flights from Linate to Malpensa, which was imposed a few hours before the
planned deadline of 15 December 1999, has made the future of the air traffic system in northern Italy
totally uncertain, with consequences for the progress of operations for both European border links and the
development of connections with the Mediterranean area.

In the light of the above, what measures does the Community intend to take to ensure that
the
programmes that have been set up are adhered to and to avoid a loss of efficiency and competitiveness
in the airport system caused by unsustainable competition between the airports of Malpensa, Linate and
Bergamo Orio al Serio, in breach of the rules set for operating limits on the airport of Linate, which is
only supposed to remain open for the Milan (cid:129) Rome Fiumicino shuttle service?

C 330 E/74

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

21.11.2000

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(6 March 2000)

The Community has no direct competence as regards the adoption of measures to remedy a loss of
efficiency and competitiveness in an airport system. This question, the purpose of which amounts to laying
down rules for the distribution of traffic between the airports within an airport system, falls within the
authority of the Member States under their national transport policies, as expressly provided under Article
8(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92 (1). The Commission(cid:146)s role is confined to verifying whether such rules
are consistent with Community law, in particular with the principles of non-discrimination and propor-
tionality.

The Italian authorities decided to suspend the transfers of flights from Linate to Malpensa airport which
were originally planned for 15 December 1999 and 15 January 2000 respectively. This decision was taken
because of the uncertainty caused by measures introduced at Malpensa airport to reduce its environmental
impact. Accordingly it now falls to the Italian authorities to lay down new rules for the distribution of
traffic in the Milan airport system (Malpensa, Linate and Orio al Serio) in compliance with Community
law.

(1) Council Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92 of 23 July 1992 on access for Community air carriers to intra-Community

air routes, OJ L 240, 24.8.1992.

(2000/C 330 E/081)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0068/00

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(24 January 2000)

Subject: Construction of the Itoiz dam

Construction of a new dam (cid:129) the Itoiz dam (cid:129) to create a reservoir on the rivers Irai and Urrobi in
Navarre (Basque country) has been under way since 1993. The total cost of the project is in the order of
EUR 1,78 billion. According to the promoters, the reservoir will be used to irrigate 57 000 ha of farmland
in the south of Navarre, to supply water to Irunea and to generate electricity.

The local population and environmental groups are wary of the construction of the dam because fifteen
villages will disappear, either wholly or partially, together with three designated nature conservation areas
(Txintxurrenea, Gaztelu and Inarbe). Two areas under threat enjoy special European protection status.

On 29 September 1995 the technical project for a reservoir on the rivers Irai and Urrobia was annulled by
the national court of justice. The supreme court later upheld this ruling. Nevertheless, construction of the
dam went ahead unimpeded. In late 1998 it was announced that the Commission had wrongly dismissed a
complaint against the start-up of the project.

1.

(a) Which EU institutions have been and/or are involved in the construction of the Itoiz dam?

(b) Why were/are these EU institutions involved?

(c) To what extent is the EU financing the Itoiz dam?

In view of the fact that fifteen villages will disappear, either partially or wholly, along with three
is EU

2.
designated nature conservation areas, two of which enjoy special European protection status,
financing subject to any environmental and/or other conditions?

(a)

If not, why not?

(b)

If so, does the Commission believe that the conditions are satisfied by the construction firm?