WRITTEN QUESTION P-0976/00 by Ursula Schleicher (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Continuation of the building projects in the Sintra-Cascais natural park in Portugal.
Date: 2000-03-22
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU environmental policy, Lisbon and the Tagus Valley, Portugal, protected area, urbanisation

C 374 E/194

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

28.12.2000

(2000/C 374 E/227)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0972/00

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(31 March 2000)

Subject: Aid from Community funds

Over 150 workers at (cid:145)Lisnave (cid:129) Lisbon Naval Shipyards Ltd(cid:146) have been waiting for 15 years to be taken
on again by this undertaking, having been forcibly dismissed a move which they have never accepted.

It is now reported that (cid:145)Lisnave(cid:146) or (cid:145)Gestnave (cid:129) Industrial Services Ltd(cid:146), the successor company, received
aid from Community funds.

In view of the above, will the Commission say:

1. What Community funds were allocated to these undertakings?

2.

In allocating Community funds, was due attention paid to the need to maintain jobs?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(26 May 2000)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its
findings as soon as possible.

(2000/C 374 E/228)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0976/00

by Ursula Schleicher (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(22 March 2000)

Subject: Continuation of the building projects in the Sintra-Cascais natural park in Portugal

In the answer to my Written Question E-1977/99 (1) Mrs Wallstr(cid:246)m stated that she had registered the cases
notified by me and sought clarification from the Porguese authorities.

Is the Commission aware that the above building projects in particular in the Cabo Raso and Abano areas
(cid:129) notwithstanding statements by the competent national authorities to the contrary (cid:129) are being continued
and have already resulted in considerable damage to the natural park which is visible to all and to which
the Portuguese media have repeatedly drawn attention?

(1) OJ C 219 E, 1.8.2000, p. 57.

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

(19 April 2000)

The two building projects in the Cabo Raso and Abano areas of the Sintra-Cascais park, which has been
proposed as a site of Community importance by the Portuguese authorities, were registered as case
No 1999/2275.

Having examined the case, the Commission wrote to the Portuguese authorities on 4 January 2000 to
draw their attention to the obligations laid down in Directives 92/43/EEC (Habitats) (1) and 85/337/EEC
(Impact Assessment) (2). At the same time, it asked them for their assessment of the situation. No reply has
been forthcoming.

28.12.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 374 E/195

At its meeting on 21 March 2000, taking the view that the projects were not being carried out in
compliance with the above-mentioned Directives, the Commission decided to pursue the case under
Article 226 (ex 169) of the EC Treaty.

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.
(2) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.

(2000/C 374 E/229)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0977/00

by Juan Ojeda Sanz (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Situation of the European shipbuilding industry

(22 March 2000)

During February and March a delegation from the European Commission met with the South Korean
authorities to express once more the grave concern in the European shipbuilding sector regarding the well-
documented unfair practices employed by this country, which have brought the industry to the brink of
destruction.

Will the Commission explain which issues were discussed and why no agreement was reached?

Knowing the desperate situation of the sector, what action does the Commission intend to take next?

Given that this question does not just affect Europe, do the United States and Japan share the European
Union(cid:146)s concerns?

If South Korea maintains its inflexible position, does the Commission, with the support of the European
shipbuilding industry, intend to take up the issue with the World Trade Organisation?

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(18 April 2000)

The Commission shares the concern expressed by the Honourable Member in regard to the European
shipbuilding industry.

In line with the Industry Council(cid:146)s conclusions of 9 November 1999, the Commission has initiated a
dialogue with Korea aiming to halt the unfair practices of Korean shipyards. The Commission has had
three bilateral meetings, one in Paris in December 1999, the second in Seoul in February 2000 and the
third in Brussels from 14 to 16 March 2000. The aim of
the discussions was to obtain definite
commitments from Korea with a view to stabilising the world shipbuilding market, which would help to
bring prices up. To achieve this, Korea should undertake not to aid shipyards in difficulty and not to
subsidise the sector either directly or indirectly. It should also make commitments to financial transparency
and compliance with international accountancy standards.

On 29 March 2000 Korea sent (cid:145)agreed minutes(cid:146) accepting the Commission(cid:146)s proposals, with some
exceptions. If an agreement is reached in the near future, the Commission (cid:129) together with the European
industry and the Member States (cid:129) will check very carefully that Korea fulfils its commitments.

However, should Korea not deliver or if there are no tangible results on the market, the European industry
has said that it will file a complaint with the Commission (under the Trade Barriers Regulation, i.e. Council
Regulation No 3286/94 of 22 December 1994 laying down Community procedures in the field of the
common commercial policy in order to ensure the exercise of the Community(cid:146)s rights under international
trade rules, in particular those established under the auspices of the World Trade Organisation) (1) against
Korean subsidy practices. If the complaint provided sufficient evidence the Commission would be prepared