WRITTEN QUESTION E-3599/00 by Luciano Caveri (ELDR) to the Commission. Signature of Protocols by the Commission.
Date: 2000-11-22
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Alpine Region, EU regional policy, European Regional Development Fund, international convention, mountain region, protocol to an agreement, ratification of an agreement, regional aid

3.7.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 187 E/19

Does the Commission not consider that there is a need to ask the Greek authorities to refund the
Community funds granted for this project, if Community rules are not being complied with?

in the Commission(cid:146)s view, would be the risks caused by widespread application of the above

What,
provision under Law 2721/1999?

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985. The assessment provides no details of the works or environment affected, no assessment of the
consequences in all their possible forms, no detail of proposed pollution prevention, reduction or compensation
measures, no consideration of advantages and disadvantages, no justification according to purely environmental
criteria of the solution chosen and no analysis of alternative solutions to protect the Bay of Milos and its eco-
system, the second largest natural bay in the Mediterranean. The Island of Milos is already severely affected by
mineral extraction activities and plans to extend such activities, which are seriously affecting the environment (see
Written Question E-0318/2000). The inclusion of the region on the west coast of Milos in the Natura 2000
network, under Directive 92/43/EEC, published in OJ L 206, 22.7.1992) is being held up by the local authorities
who are mainly responsible for the works concerned.

(2) The main reason for the works is to enlarge the area available for restaurants and bars.

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

(8 February 2001)

Member States do not regularly inform the Commission on the application of Council Directive 85/337/
EEC of 27 June 1985, as amended by Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997, on the assessment of
the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (1). Consequently, and in response to
the Honourable Member(cid:146)s question, the Commission will contact the Greek authorities to ascertain
whether all procedures laid down in the legislation have indeed been carried out.

Where the Commission finds non-compliance with Community law, it may require national authorities to
remove all spending on the project in question from the statement of expenditure bringing to a close the
1994-1999 Multifund Operational Programme for the South Aegean.

As regards Article 35 of Law 2721/99, the Commission would point out that, as things currently stand,
since this is a national law detailing the procedures for third parties to take a case to court, it does not
come under the Community(cid:146)s jurisdiction.

(1) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997.

(2001/C 187 E/019)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3599/00

by Luciano Caveri (ELDR) to the Commission

(22 November 2000)

Subject: Signature of Protocols by the Commission

The Alpine Convention, which the European Union signed in 1991 and ratified in 1996, entered into
force in 1998 (while the subsequent protocol on Monaco(cid:146)s accession entered into force in 1999). The
European Union has also signed three implementing protocols (regional planning and sustainable devel-
opment, mountain farming, conservation of nature and the countryside), but has not signed the four other
protocols (mountain forests, tourism, soil conservation, energy) and, by the end of October, had not yet
signed the new transport protocol. At the Sixth Alpine Conference in Lucerne (Switzerland) on 30 and
31 October 2000, the Commission was notable by its absence.

What was the significance of the Commission(cid:146)s failure to attend the conference? What is the explanation
for the Commission(cid:146)s failure to sign any protocols since 1994? Is the Commission interested in the Alpine
Convention? Does the Commission anticipate that the protocols that have already been signed will be
ratified? In future, will the Commission be actively involved in the work of the standing committee and of
the Conference? What is the Commission(cid:146)s opinion of the European Charter of Mountain Regions?

C 187 E/20

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.7.2001

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

(26 January 2001)

The Community has not signed the protocols on tourism, mountain forests, soil conservation and energy
as it believes that implementing the Alpine Convention and in particular, the above protocols, should be
carried out by the Alpine Member States and regions involved rather than at Community level.

However, the Community has played an active role in negotiating the transport protocol, which was only
opened to signature by the parties to the Alpine Convention at the most recent ministerial meeting held
on 31 October 2000. It was unable to add its signature during that meeting since the procedure for
signing the protocol by the Community had not yet been completed.

The Commission(cid:146)s absence from work carried out in the context of the Alpine Convention and from the
last ministerial meeting should not be attributed to a lack of interest in the implementation of the
Convention. Budgetary and human resource limitations mean that the Commission cannot attend every
meeting convened by the Standing Committee of the Convention and the Commission does not have any
immediate plans to ratify the protocols that have been signed. Nonetheless, issues regarding mountain life
are taken into account in the EU(cid:146)s structural policies and the regional and rural development programmes.

Regions facing difficulties and economic conversion are the main priority of European regional policy,
which allocates Community aid to most mountainous regions on this basis. Moreover, certain Community
initiatives such as Interreg II and Leader+ take special account of mountain issues. Leader+ in particular
represents an opportunity for mountainous rural regions.

During the new programming period (2000-2006) for the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF),
there will be for the first time a programme for the Alpine region covering the whole Alpine area and
areas covered by the Alpine Convention. France,
Italy, Switzerland, Austria, Germany, Slovenia and
Liechtenstein are all involved in the programme. The overall budget is expected to total at least € 120
million, 60 million of which will come from the ERDF to build on the cross-border cooperation that began
in the previous period.

Concerning rural development, the general framework proposed by the Commission appears to be suitably
adapted to the multi-functional role and diversity of mountainous regions. Reorganising rural development
policy should foster enhanced integration of existing instruments and considerable decentralisation of the
ways in which these instruments are used. Setting up specific regional programmes will be particularly
important in terms of focusing on the specific needs of regions in the EU, and mountainous regions should
especially benefit from this on account of their distinctive characteristics.

Moreover, the Commission(cid:146)s participation in the first World Mountain Forum (1) in June 2000 confirms its
interest in tackling the specific needs faced by these regions.

Lastly, a booklet on structural policies and mountain areas was published recently. It is the first document
for eleven years produced by the Commission exclusively dedicated to mountainous regions.

The European Charter of Mountainous Regions was drawn up by the Council of Europe with the aim of
encouraging the development of specific policies for these areas. Representatives of Member States and
non-governmental organisations are involved and have approved the Charter. The Commission encourages
such initiatives but is not actively involved.

(1)

ISBN No 92-828-8977-7. Catalogue No OPOCE KN-28-00-204-FR-C.