WRITTEN QUESTION P-1378/00 by Reinhold Messner (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Asti-Cuneo motorway.
Date: 2000-04-27
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Italy, Piedmont, environmental impact, infringement of EU law, invitation to tender, road building

C 374 E/218

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

28.12.2000

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(26 May 2000)

The Proposal for a Parliament and Council Directive on food supplements which had been announced in
paragraph 105 of the White Paper on Food Safety was adopted by the Commission on 8 May 2000. It will
soon be transmitted to Council and Parliament, and published in the Official Journal.

(2000/C 374 E/259)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1378/00

by Reinhold Messner (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(27 April 2000)

Subject: Asti-Cuneo motorway

The Italian government appears to intend to begin to work on the Asti-Cuneo motorway in the Piedmont
region, on the basis of renewal of the concession granted to SATAP (SocietÆ Autostrada Torino-Piacenza).
This company will thus be responsible for both the Turin-Piacenza link and the Asti-Cuneo link. No call
for tenders has been made. The government has also, by ministerial decree, approved 19 agreements made
with concessionaires (in 19 separate ministerial decrees). The Italian Court of Auditors, which has
unblocked seven of the 19 conventions between ANAS (the Italian national roads authority) and the
19 concessionaires, has not yet given an opinion on the extension of the concession to SATAP. However,
in September 1999 the Counsellor-Delegate of the Court of Auditors responsible for monitoring ANAS
wrote to the Italian government expressing the view that the concession granted by the government to
SATAP in 1991 is not in conformity with the law, since it took the form of a private transaction, despite
the fact that Directive 89/440/EEC (1), under which a public call for tenders is mandatory, was already in
force.

Furthermore, in 1993 the Asti-Cuneo project was refused approval by the environmental impact assess-
ment committee of the Italian environment ministry; this decision was reversed by the Italian cabinet, in
votes in 1994 and 1999, on the basis of changes to the project which, however, entailed neither a fresh
environmental impact assessment nor the republication of the project (which would have allowed the
citizens affected by the proposed route to submit their comments).

In the specific case of the Asti-Cuneo link, an appeal is pending before the Administrative Tribunal of the
Lazio region concerning the Massimimi-Cuneo stretch. In addition, a judicial inquiry is in progress into
SATAP(cid:146)s accounts, following 33 calls for legal investigation of alleged cases of accounting fraud by the
company(cid:146)s administrators.

In view of the above, does the Commission not consider that the extension of the motorway concession by
the Italian government to SATAP, without a call for tenders,
in
particular, to Directives 92/50/EEC (2), 93/36/EEC (3) and 93/37/EEC (4), and that this extension is undesir-
able, given that several legal inquiries are under way into the Italian concessionaire(cid:146)s affairs? Does the
Commission not also consider that there should be an environmental
impact assessment of the new
project?

is contrary to Community law, and,

(1) OJ L 210, 21.7.1989. p. 1.
(2) OJ L 209, 24.7.1992, p. 1.
(3) OJ L 199, 9.8.1993, p. 1.
(4) OJ L 199, 9.8.1993, p. 54.

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(29 May 2000)

The Commission intends to ask the Italian authorities for all the information needed to assess the
compatibility with Community law of the contracts for the construction of the new stretch of the Asti-
Cuneo motorway, and of the extension of the concession to the SATAP company, as raised by the
Honourable Member. Should the examination of that information reveal that the procedures followed were
incompatible with the above-mentioned Community law, the Commission could initiate infringement
proceedings pursuant to Article 226 (ex Article 169) of the EC Treaty.

28.12.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 374 E/219

It should, however, be pointed out that this question, and that of the other concessions referred to by the
Honourable Member, must be viewed within the more general framework of the motorway concessions in
all the Member States, which the Commission is currently studying.

The Italian authorities have already provided the Commission with information on the general regulatory
framework governing extensions of existing concessions. Under Ministerial Directive No 283 of 20 October
1998, existing concessions can be extended only if there is a financial settlement of the dispute deriving
from the freezing of charges which entitles the concessionaires to a refund. In addition, under the same
Ministerial Directive, any motorway concessionaire would be obliged by law, as well as by each individual
agreement, to award all works contracts according to the Community award rules, and to award at least
40 % of the work to third parties.

This information, and that from the other Member States, is currently being examined by the Commission
with a view to devising a consistent approach to all motorway concessions, having regard to the major
economic and social implications of the matter at stake.

As regards the environmental impact assessment, on the basis of the information given by the Honourable
Member, the Commission is not in a position to take a view on the subject matter. Should the modified
Asti-Cuneo motorway project have been authorised in order substantially to comply with the criticisms
made in the original environmental impact assessment (EIA) procedure, it would not necessarily need to
have been made the subject of a new EIA procedure. The Honourable Member is kindly requested to give
more information on the matter in order to enable the Commission to assess the case.

(2000/C 374 E/260)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1415/00

by Marie-Noºlle Lienemann (PSE) to the Commission

Subject: Investigation regarding state aids to the (cid:145)CrØdit Mutuel(cid:146)

(3 May 2000)

To what extent is it possible to speak of state aids in the case of the French cooperative bank, (cid:145)CrØdit
Mutuel(cid:146), since the bank in question raises funds and supports private savings and the sums concerned are
allocated to general interest purposes as defined by the public authorities, such as local development and
low-cost housing. Furthermore, CrØdit Mutuel(cid:146) is required in return to comply with a number of specific
additional requirements (notably restrictions on its network and field of operation).

In the very few disputes concerning savings examined by the Commission, the solutions reached have
never involved fines. Does the Commission not believe that in such cases emphasis should be placed on
finding a fair and progressive solution to any dispute, since support for savings, particularly private saving,
must be a major priority for Europe and indeed is recognised as such in most Member States?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(24 May 2000)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the reply it gave to her oral question H-0386/00
during question time at Parliament(cid:146)s Mai II 2000 part-session (1).

(1) Debates of the European Parliament (May 2000).