WRITTEN QUESTION E-3282/00 by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE-DE) to the Council. Structural aid for Objective 1 regions from 2006.
Date: 2000-10-25
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Structural Funds, accession to the European Union, eligibility criteria, eligible region, less-favoured region, regional planning

C 163 E/76

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

6.6.2001

Given that:

(cid:129) the aforementioned Valencia hispanica, or Samaruc, a protected species listed in Annex II of Directive

92/43/EEC (1), is now to be found only in the Albufera de Valencia and Prat de Peæ(cid:237)scola;

(cid:129) in its reply to Written Question E-0447/00 of 7 April 2000 (2) the Commission pledged to see to it
that the provisions of Annex II of Directive 85/337/EEC (3) on environmental impact assessments were
properly implemented in relation to the planned work in the Peæ(cid:237)scola marshes.

In view of these facts, does the Commission not believe that infringement proceedings ought to be brought
against Spain for violating the Directive on habitats where the protection of the wetlands environment and
conservation of the Valencia hispanica species are concerned?

Does it know whether the Spanish authorities have as yet taken steps to implement properly the Directive
on environmental impact assessments in the case of the work planned by Levinsa in the marsh area?

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.
(2) OJ C 26 E, 26.1.2001, p. 44.
(3) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40.

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

(14 December 2000)

The Commission has introduced an infringement procedure against Spain under Article 226 (ex Article
169) of the EC Treaty with regard to several projects affecting the (cid:145)Marjal de Peæ(cid:237)scola(cid:146) nature area in
Castell(cid:243)n province.

It should be pointed out that the Spanish authorities have not yet officially communicated to the
Commission the inclusion of the Marjal de Peæ(cid:237)scola site in the list of sites to be incorporated in the
Natura 2000 network provided for in Article 4 of Council Directive 92/43/EEC (1) of 21 May 1992 on the
conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora.

In the framework of the taking of evidence in this infringement procedure, the Commission considers that
the Spanish authorities have not taken the requisite measures to establish a system of strict protection for
the Valencia hispanica species, a priority species listed in Annex IV to Directive 92/43/EEC, as required by
Article 12(1)d) of the Directive. The threats to the habitats of this species stem from beach development
schemes and a road project. The Commission has just received the Spanish authorities(cid:146) reply and is now
examining it.

It has to be said, however, that the Commission is not aware of the new urbanisation project mentioned
by the Honourable Member. It has accordingly asked the Spanish authorities for information on that
project and its impact on the Marjal de Peæ(cid:237)scola area.

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

(2001/C 163 E/080)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3282/00

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE-DE) to the Council

Subject: Structural aid for Objective 1 regions from 2006

(25 October 2000)

In the current programming period Objective 1 regions are those whose per capita GDP (cid:129) measured in
standard purchasing power and calculated on the basis of Community data for the three most recent years
available on 26 March 1999 (cid:129) is less than 75 % of the average in the 15 Member States which currently
make up the EU.

6.6.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 163 E/77

In addition to this consideration, it is undoubtedly the case now that the average in the applicant countries
lies far below both this 75 % figure and average GDP in the existing Objective 1 regions, and this will
certainly still be the case when the first applicant countries accede to the EU.

In view of these facts, will the Council say what criteria will be employed in selecting the future Objective
1 regions in the next programming period beginning on 1 January 2007, after the accession of some of
the applicant countries?

What guidelines will govern the approach in respect of structural aid to current Objective 1 regions in the
EU which exceed the 75 % average when the new programming period commences on 1 January 2007 as
a result of the accession of applicant countries? Is a transition or phasing-out period similar in nature to
that of the current programming period being considered as an option? Or conversely, as would appear
logical, will a new transition system be set up for those Objective 1 regions whose GDP exceeds 75 % of
average GDP in the Member States as a whole, including the new Member States, but remains below that
75 % mark in respect of the Fifteen?

Reply

(26 February 2001)

The Council has not yet received a proposal from the Commission defining the criteria for selecting future
Objective 1 regions for the next programming period, from 1 January 2007. Consequently the Council
cannot give a more precise reply to the Honourable Member(cid:146)s questions.

(2001/C 163 E/081)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3283/00

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(25 October 2000)

Subject: Structural aid for Objective 1 regions from 2006

In the current programming period Objective 1 regions are those whose per capita GDP (cid:129) measured in
standard purchasing power and calculated on the basis of Community data for the three most recent years
available on 26 March 1999 (cid:129) is less than 75 % of the average in the 15 Member States which currently
make up the EU.

In addition to this consideration, it is undoubtedly the case now that the average in the applicant countries
lies far below both this 75 % figure and average GDP in the existing Objective 1 regions, and this will
certainly still be the case when the first applicant countries accede to the EU.

In view of these facts, will the Commission say what criteria will be employed in selecting the future
Objective 1 regions in the next programming period beginning on 1 January 2007, after the accession of
some of the applicant countries?

What guidelines will govern the approach in respect of structural aid to current Objective 1 regions in the
EU which exceed the 75 % average when the new programming period commences on 1 January 2007 as
a result of the accession of applicant countries? Is a transition or phasing-out period similar in nature to
that of the current programming period being considered as an option? Or conversely, as would appear
logical, will a new transition system be set up for those Objective 1 regions whose GDP exceeds 75 % of
average GDP in the Member States as a whole, including the new Member States, but remains below that
75 % mark in respect of the Fifteen?