WRITTEN QUESTION P-2843/00 by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission. Fine imposed on Greece.
Date: 2000-09-04
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Greece, environmental law, judgment of the Court (EU), periodic penalty payment

8.5.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 136 E/107

Does the Commission agree that such (cid:145)open skies(cid:146) agreements prevent both the national governments
2.
of the Member States and the European Union from pursuing an active policy of curbing further
expansion in aviation and strengthening the competitive position of railways for transport over medium
distances of up to 2 000 km?

3. What action does the Commission intend to take to prevent a further increase in (cid:145)open skies(cid:146)
agreements?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(31 October 2000)

1.
The Commission is familiar with the position of the American administration as regards the KLM/
British Airways merger negotiations. As the Honourable Member will be aware, these negotiations have
been discontinued.

The Commission has made a proposal to the Council to establish a common position as regards the
2.
United States with the aim to conclude a transatlantic common aviation area (TCAA) between the
European economic area (EEA) and the United States. Clearly, individual open skies agreements substan-
tially hinder both the establishment of a common position and effective Community negotiations with the
United States.

It is noted that the competitive position of railways cannot be a major factor in the discussions on
transatlantic air transport links. A TCAA would however facilitate air and rail
intermodality for intra
European and intra American transport, particularly as regards high speed rail links.

3. With the adoption of the so-called (cid:145)third package(cid:146), the establishment of the internal air transport
market of the Community, the Commission takes the view that such agreements can only be concluded at
Community level. The Commission starts infringement proceedings (Article 226 of the EC Treaty (formerly
Article 169)) against every Member State that concludes or has concluded a bilateral air transport
arrangement with the United States after June 1992 (the adoption of the third package). For eight Member
States (Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Luxembourg, Austria, Finland, Sweden and the United Kingdom) this
procedure has now been completed. Because these Member States did not comply with the reasoned
opinion of the Commission, the Commission brought these eight Member States before the Court of
justice in 1998. Against France and the Netherlands an infringement procedure is still pending.

(2001/C 136 E/122)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2843/00

by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission

(4 September 2000)

Subject: Fine imposed on Greece

Following the recent landmark ruling by the European Court of Justice that Greece must pay a daily fine
for failure to comply with environmental legislation, will the Commission state how much Greece has paid
to date or when it is expected that Greece will make a first payment?

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

(16 October 2000)

In its judgment of 4 July 2000 (1) the Court of Justice required Greece to pay to the Commission(cid:146)s (cid:145)EC own
resources(cid:146) account a penalty payment of € 20 000 for each day(cid:146)s delay in taking the action needed in order
to comply with the Commission/Greece judgment of 7 April 1992, dating from the time when that
judgment was handed down, and continuing until that action has been taken.

C 136 E/108

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

8.5.2001

Since this is an initial judgment based on Article 228 (former Article 171) of the EC Treaty requiring the
payment of a penalty by a Member State, the Commission, taking account of the existing rules (2), will send
a letter to the Greek authorities setting out the conditions attached to payment of the amount involved in
the daily penalty payment which began to take effect on the date when the abovementioned judgment was
handed down and which will continue to be due until Greece meets the requirements of the order.

(1) Case C-387/97.
(2) Decision of 14 December 1994 on the internal-procedure provisions governing the recovery of lump sums or

periodic penalty payments required by the Court of Justice under Article 171 of the EC Treaty.

(2001/C 136 E/123)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2847/00

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(8 September 2000)

Subject: Access to EU documents

During the summer months a working party of senior Coreper officials drew up a proposal for a drastic
reduction in the accessibility of EU documents. Yet the Treaty of Amsterdam expressly provides for the
right of access to such documents.

The working party wants to use the written procedure to enshrine this proposal in a binding text. This will
excluder the European Parliament, the Commission and the September Council.

Only the representatives of the Netherlands, Sweden and Finland have opposed the curtailing of the right
of access. The other Coreper representatives appear to believe that the Commission proposal (cid:129) a code of
conduct via the codecision procedure (cid:129) does not reflect their personal views on access to EU documents.

Does the Commission subscribe to the proposal concerning access to EU documents as drawn up by

1.
a working party of senior Coreper officials? If not, will it appeal against the proposal in question?

2.
Does the Commission believe that the proposal concerning access to EU documents as drawn up by
a working party of senior Coreper officials undermines its own proposal, i.e. a code of conduct via the
codecision procedure? If so, what action will the Commission take to ensure that its proposal is the official
guideline for access to EU documents?

Does the Commission think the proposal by the Coreper officials is an infringement of the provision
it challenge this

3.
in the Treaty of Amsterdam on access to EU documents? If so,
infringement of the provisions of the Treaty?

in what way will

Answer given by Romano Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(26 October 2000)

On 14 August 2000, the Council adopted Decision 2000/527/EC amending Decision 93/731/EC on public
access to Council documents and Decision 2000/23/EC on the improvement of information on the
Council(cid:146)s legislative activities and the public register of Council documents (1). As a result of the new
Decision, documents classified as top secret, secret or confidential which relate to security and defence
matters are excluded from the scope of the provisions on access to documents and are no longer included
in the public register of Council documents.

Until this Decision was adopted, access to Council documents was governed by a joint code of conduct for
the Council and Commission, which did not a priori preclude access to any document; however, one
exception was access to documents whose disclosure could undermine the public interest and,
in
particular, public safety.