WRITTEN QUESTION E-0896/00 by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Contamination caused by a concrete factory in the municipality of O Corgo (Lugo, Galicia).
Date: 2000-03-22
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Galicia, Spain, Structural Funds, bathing water, concrete, infringement of EU law, pollution of waterways

20.2.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 53 E/37

(2001/C 53 E/040)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0878/00

by Ole Krarup (EDD) to the Commission

(22 March 2000)

Subject: EU defence aspirations

At the Helsinki EU Summit in December it was decided to equip the Union for civilian and military crisis
management by measures including the establishment of a 50 000-60 000-strong rapid reaction force. The
Portuguese Presidency has said in this context that building up the EU(cid:146)s future capabilities will affect both
our defence budgets and our public opinion (Presidency invitation to the governments of the Member
States for the discussion of the Union(cid:146)s defence policy aspirations, 28 February 2000).

What increases in the Member States(cid:146) defence budgets is the build-up of EU military capabilities expected
to entail? Please show the overall percentage increase and a breakdown with the extra spending for each
Member State.

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(3 May 2000)

The military headline goal announced at the Helsinki European Council will certainly require a concerted
effort on the part of the Member States. It should be noted, though, that military expenditure is the sole
responsibility of Member States themselves. Questions concerning national defence budgets should there-
fore rightfully be addressed to the Member States.

For its part, and within its specific areas of competence, the Commission will contribute fully to the
achievement of the objectives of ESDP, including the realisation of the headline goals. This is right and
proper, since there is clearly an umbilical link between the military and non-military dimensions of conflict
prevention, conflict resolution and crisis management. The Commission has considerable experience and
extensive responsiblities in the non-military field.

(2001/C 53 E/041)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0896/00

by Camilo Nogueira RomÆn (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(22 March 2000)

Subject: Contamination caused by a concrete factory in the municipality of O Corgo (Lugo, Galicia)

A concrete factory is currently being constructed in O Corgo (Lugo, Galicia) without a building and
operating permit having been granted. This factory discharges 7 500 litres of contaminated water a day
into the Chamoso and Da Lama rivers, on whose banks the authorities are building a beach.

Given that the river beach project is being implemented with the support of Community funds (Proder
programme: Programme for rural development and diversification of rural areas, partially financed by
EAGGF Guarantee Section funds and the ERDF for the period 1996-1999, this particular project being
supervised by the Proder Minho of the Lugo local government), does the Commission not consider that the
EU must intervene to ensure that environmental protection standards are respected?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(24 May 2000)

Projects part-financed from Community funds must satisfy the rules on environmental protection and
improvement in force, notably those of Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 laying down general provisions on

C 53 E/38

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.2.2001

the Structural Funds (1). The Commission will notify the Spanish authorities of the situation reported by the
Honourable Member. Council Directive 76/464/EEC of 4 May 1976 on pollution caused by certain
dangerous substances discharged into the aquatic environment of the Community (2) requires the elimina-
tion of 17 substances (List I) and the reduction of a large number of other substances and groups of
substances (List II). Additional information is needed to decide whether the Directive is breached in this
particular case.

Community legislation on bathing water quality on beaches (inland waters or coastal waters) (Council
Directive 76/160/EEC of 8 December 1975 on the quality of bathing water (3)) sets quality objectives for
bathing waters, obliges Member States to achieve them, regularly monitor the quality of all bathing areas
and report their findings annually to the Commission, and calls on the Commission to publish these (last
report May 1999, next report May 2000). The report is also made available on the Internet.

For the Lugo area on the River Miæo in Galicia there are at present five places identified as bathing areas
and regularly monitored. The latest report published in 1999 shows for all five a water quality complying
with the Directive. An industrial activity does not exempt a Member State from taking all measures to
comply with the quality requirements. The bathing water Directive provides two options: either the water
quality is maintained under the new conditions or the beach is closed, i.e. bathing is banned.

(1) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.
(2) OJ L 129, 18.5.1976.
(3) OJ L 31, 5.2.1976.

(2001/C 53 E/042)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0911/00

by Hiltrud Breyer (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(25 March 2000)

Subject: Infringement of the directives on natural habitats and wild fauna and flora in connection with the

extension of the Gersheim-Rubenheim golf course

1.
Is the Commission aware that the planned extension of the golf course at Gersheim-Rubenheim
would have a massive impact on an area which may come under the directive on the conservation of
natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, and represents a serious threat to a habitat to be conserved as
a matter of priority, in which, inter alia, the butterfly species Eurodryas aurinia and Maculinea arion are to
be found?

2.
Does the Commission take the view that a serious assessment of compatibility with the objectives
under the directive on natural habitats and wild fauna and flora can only be made where a complete
growing season has been studied?

Does the Commission agree that the Gersheim municipal council cannot be allowed to irresponsibly

3.
disregard EU law?

Does the Commission agree that, in the face of such a flagrant breach of EU law, infringement

4.
proceedings should be considered?

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

(18 May 2000)

The Commission has recently been informed about a golf course project in Gersheim/Rubenheim, the
enlargement of which might harm a potential site of Community importance, a site which should be
proposed under Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and
of wild fauna and flora (1) (Habitats Directive).