WRITTEN QUESTION E-2718/01 by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Commission. Reasoned opinions and the situation in Sardinia.
Date: 2001-10-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Sardinia, application of EU law, competence of the Member States, economic development, environmental protection, local government, opinion (EU), tourism

6.6.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 134 E/85

criteria when assessing adequacy and awarding contracts. These criteria cover consumer, employee and
environmental interests. The Parliament’s Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism (RETT) Committee has
proposed a number of amendments to reinforce this part of the draft Regulation, many of which the
Commission can support.

One of the quality criteria specifically referred to in the Commission’s proposal is ‘passenger health and
safety’. Safety will continue to be of prime importance and the authority will be able to spell out the
requirements and standards it is placing on operators through contract conditions, general rules or both.
Safety is often closely related to the quality and maintenance of the infrastructure and the vehicles: again,
where these are the responsibility of the operator, the authority is able to set standards, however stringent,
through contract conditions and general rules. In the case of rail services (including metro and light rail),
the proposal includes an exception from competition in cases where an authority concludes that this is the
only way that national and international safety standards can be met. Evidence from Member States that
is not
have already introduced controlled competition along the lines of the Commission’s proposal
consistent with the view that this reduces safety.

The Commission recognises that many public transport services are dependent upon public funding and
that authorities often wish to provide reduced-fare or free public transport for some or all of their citizens.
Existing Community law (Regulation (EEC) No 1191/69 of the Council of 26 June 1969 on action by
Member States concerning the obligations inherent in the concept of a public service in transport by rail,
road and inland waterway (1), as amended by Council Regulation (EEC) No 1893/91 of 20 June 1991 (2))
seeks to ensure that money paid to undertakings for such reasons is compatible with State aid rules. In
particular,
financial compensation should not exceed the additional costs borne by the operator for
fulfilling public service obligations laid down by the authority. The proposed Regulation on public service
requirements does not impose any additional restrictions on the amount of money that authorities can pay
to public transport operators for the fulfilment of public service obligations.

(1) OJ L 156, 28.6.1969.
(2) OJ L 169, 29.6.1991.

(2002/C 134 E/088)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2718/01

by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Commission

(3 October 2001)

Subject: Reasoned opinions and the situation in Sardinia

On 9 February 2001 the Commission delivered a ‘reasoned opinion’ on an alleged infringement relating to
a tourist development area in Sardinia. This opinion, which was promptly refuted by the Sardinia Region
(Prot. No 4534 of 2 April 2001) takes no account of the documents submitted by the Region as evidence
of the project’s legality and compliance with environmental protection standards and ignores the existence
of an environmental all-clear given by the competent authorities. However, what is surprising is the
Region’s statement that the Commission opinion is based on inaccurate information.

Will the Commission state:

= from what source it draws its information before drawing up documents which hamper economic

activity and throw suspicion on the legitimate and legal action of local authorities?

= why it has refused to dialogue with the regional authorities before delivering opinions which, in the

view of those concerned, do not accurately reflect the local situation?

C 134 E/86

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

6.6.2002

= why, after five months, it has not yet replied to the document drawn up by the Sardinia Region’s

environmental office?

= why, after all it has said over the years about regional policy, its officials actually failed to recognise

the competent authority in environmental matters, namely, in this case, the Sardinia Region?

= whether it does not agree that this is yet another development which will make European integration
unpopular with ordinary citizens and encourage them to see the Community administration as
insensitive to local needs?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(12 November 2001)

The Commission’s powers are limited to those conferred on it by the EC Treaty,
it is
responsible for ensuring that Community law is properly applied within all Member States. On the basis of
Article 211 (ex Article 155) of the EC Treaty, ‘In order to ensure the proper functioning and development
of the common market, the Commission shall ensure that the provisions of this Treaty and the measures
taken by the institutions pursuant thereto are applied’.

in particular,

On the basis of Article 226 (ex Article 169) of the EC Treaty, ‘If the Commission considers, that a Member
State has failed to fulfil an obligation under this Treaty, it shall deliver a reasoned opinion on the matter
after giving the State concerned the opportunity to submit its observations. If the State concerned does not
comply with the opinion within the period laid down by the Commission, the latter may bring the matter
before the Court of Justice.’ Before delivering a reasoned opinion the Commission formally requests the
Member State to communicate information and observations on the issue at stake (letter of formal notice).
The Commission has a discretionary power in deciding whether to initiate such a procedure and whether
to continue it or not (1).

In the light of the above, the information on which the Commission’s reasoned opinions are based include
information contained in replies of Member States to letters of formal notice. Also in the case mentioned
by the Honourable Member, information was obtained from the reply of the Italian authorities to the letter
of formal notice. In addition, the reasoned opinion was also based on the information which had already
been sent by the Italian authorities to the Commission in the framework of the informal correspondence
which usually preceeds the delivery of the letter of formal notice and on the information which had been
exchanged in the framework of two meetings, between Italian authorities (including authorities from
Regione Sardegna) and services of Directorate General Environment of the Commission.

Member States are the official interlocutor in the framework of the infringement procedures under the EC
Treaty. Although all the authorities of a Member State are obliged to correctly apply Community law
(regions, provinces, municipalities, administrative and public bodies, courts), for purposes of Commission
infringements proceedings under Article 226 (ex Article 169) of the EC Treaty, only the State, and not the
regions or other public bodies, is held responsible for the correct application of Community law.

The Commission takes a reasonable time to assess, on the basis of the replies of Member States to reasoned
opinions, whether Member States have complied with the reasoned opinions addressed to them. In the
specific case, mentioned by the Honourable Member, the replies of the Italian authorities to the reasoned
opinion are currently under assessment.

(1)

Judgement of 6 December 1989, Commission vs. Greece, Rec. p. 4159;
Judgement of 27 November 1990,
Commission vs. Greece, Rec. p. I-4299; Judgement of 21 January 1999, Commission vs. Belgium, Rec. I-275;
judgement of 1 June 1999, Commission vs. Ireland in case C-212/98.