WRITTEN QUESTION E-4044/00 by Theresa Villiers (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Refurbishment of President Prodi's office.
Date: 2000-12-21
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU financing, President of the Commission, improvement of housing

C 187 E/118

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.7.2001

The Commission has also recently examined the compatibility with Article 81 (ex Article 85) of the
EC Treaty of the agreements concluded among the Qualiflyer group airlines.
In February 2000, the
Commission sent a warning letter to five Qualiflyer group airlines (Swissair, TAP, Sabena, Crossair and
AOM), following which these companies ceased to coordinate prices within the Community and on the
routes between the Community and Switzerland.

Competition concerns under Articles 81 and/or 82 (ex Article 86) of the EC Treaty are more likely to arise
on (cid:145)overlap(cid:146) routes, that is, on routes operated by two Qualiflyer group airlines with their respective hubs
at each end of the route, such as the Brussels-Lisbon route. Given this situation, the Commission would
appreciate receiving any information that the Honourable Member may have on a potential abuse of
a dominant position or on other anti-competitive practices on this route.

On other routes, such as the routes to and from various French cities operated by AOM, Air LibertØ and
Air Littoral, the Qualiflyer group airlines compete with the traditional flag carrier.

The Portuguese government announced its intention to sell a stake in TAP some time ago. However, the
Commission has not been notified of any such operation.

(1) OJ L 239, 7.10.1995.

(2001/C 187 E/125)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4044/00

by Theresa Villiers (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(21 December 2000)

Subject: Refurbishment of President Prodi(cid:146)s office

Following the recent refurbishment of President Prodi(cid:146)s office in Rue Breydel, could the Commission

1.
please state if this was paid for by the Commission or some other source?

If the Commission paid for this refurbishment, could the Commission please indicate (a) the total

2.
cost of the refurbishment, and (b) the budget item to which the expenditure was charged?

If the Italiatn Government has loaned items for the refurbishment, could the Commission please
3.
indicate (a) the rules governing loans from governments to the Commission, given that Commissioners are
no longer servants of their country, and (b) whether these items have been declared by President Prodi.

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(22 February 2001)

1.
The Commission at the arrival of the new College of Commissioners established a budget of € 25 000
for the refurbishing of each Commissioner(cid:146)s office with new furniture. Nevertheless instead of using the
€ 25 000 for the acquisition of new furniture, President Prodi(cid:146)s office has recently been refurbished with
antique furniture, on a free of charge loan from the Galleria Nazionale di Arte Antica in Rome.

2.
The Commission only paid the transportation and insurance for the loaned furniture, using budget
line A02353 for the transport and budget line A02350 for the insurance. In consequence, President Prodi
did not use the € 25 000 budget earmarked for the refurbishing of his office.

3.
There are no specific rules governing loans from governments to the Commission. The loan from the
Galleria Nazionale di Arte Antica was accorded to Mr Prodi as President of the European Commission for
the duration of his mandate for the refurbishment of his official office at the Commission and Mr Prodi
has declared these items in the appropriate way.

3.7.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 187 E/119

The internal regulations concerning the refurbishing of the offices of members of the Commission
4.
considered in the past only the acquisition of new furniture. For this reason they are at present being
reviewed with the objective of providing the possibility to cover other less onerous ways for refurbishing
the offices of the Members of the Commission in the future.

(2001/C 187 E/126)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-4045/00

by Giovanni Fava (PSE) to the Commission

(20 December 2000)

Subject: Building amnesty and the 2000-2006 regional operational programme in Sicily

In November, the Council of Government of the Sicilian region submitted a proposal for a law including
provision for the regularisation of unauthorised constructions built along the coastline, estimated to be
around 170 000 units. This draft law represents a wholesale repeal of the only instrument in force in Sicily
protecting the coasts, which lays down a prohibition on building in a coastal strip 150 metres wide
(regional law 78 of 12 June 1976).

The draft law provides for a line to be drawn around built-up areas whose construction was not authorised
and for the communes to be given responsibility for drawing up (cid:145)urban and environmental reorganisation
plans(cid:146) for them. This also places on the communes the tasks of delimitation and the consequent planning
of measures, avoiding entering into details regarding figures.

Such uncertainty regarding the financial resources to be made available for the regularisation makes it
seem likely that the region wishes to try to use the resources available under the 2000-2006 Structural
Funds programming period. This could be done by means of covering the measures set out in the regional
operational programme, to which the communes could have recourse when preparing projects to be
funded through ROP funds. One of the ways in which the Structural Funds could also be used is to pay the
engineers asked by the local authorities to prepare projects, and this would contribute to fostering
a considerable customer network. In the face of this risk, business (Confindustria) and organisations
protecting environmental and cultural heritage (Italia Nostra) have launched an appeal against
the
regularisation measure.

Among others, the measure is likely to affect the coastal areas included in the Natura 2000 network,
where unauthorised construction has taken place, and it could enable town-planning projects to be
legalised without any checking procedure or environmental impact assessment.

Is the Commission aware of this initiative by the Sicilian regional Council?

Can the Commission ensure that in the additional stage of programming currently being assessed the
proposal to use Structural Funds for the possible building amnesty is rejected?

Can the Commission ensure that the possible building amnesty does not permit Community legislation on
environmental impact assessment to be ignored?

What steps does the Commission intend to take to ensure that areas in the Natura 2000 network in which
unauthorised construction has taken place are not jeopardised?