WRITTEN QUESTION E-0159/02 by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Commission. Protection of the environment in the Po Delta.
Date: 2002-02-04
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU law - national law, Emilia-Romagna, application of EU law, environmental law, environmental protection, humid zone, protected area

18.7.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 172 E/157

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(4 March 2002)

Since the support in question appears to be operating aid, the Commission is afraid that the kind of
Community support suggested by the Honourable Member cannot be granted. Council Regulation (EC) No
1257/1999 of 17 May 1999 on support for rural development from the European Agricultural Guidance
and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) and amending and repealing certain Regulations (1) does not
foresee
financing for such expenses. Also the granting of national aid for such purposes would not seem possible,
since operating aid would normally be considered to be incompatible with the EC Treaty.

(1) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999.

(2002/C 172 E/164)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0151/02

by Jan Andersson (PSE) and Hans Karlsson (PSE) to the Commission

Subject: Closure and structural aid 4 Gislaved, Sweden

(1 February 2002)

Continental has decided to stop tyre manufacturing at Gislaved in Sweden. This decision will result in the
loss of about 800 jobs, and will also directly affect a number of persons performing tasks for the factory,
such as carriers of its products. Closure will also indirectly affect trade and other commercial and public
services in the local community, thus causing a further loss of jobs. It is claimed that the factory is being
closed because of the opportunity of obtaining EU aid to move production to Portugal, and that this aid
would make it commercially profitable to do so, which would not be the case without that aid.

Is it permissible to use EU structural aid to move output and jobs from one Member State to

1.
another?

2.

If it is, is the Commission prepared to initiate a review of the rules in question?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(1 March 2002)

The Honourable Members are requested to refer to the answers given by the Commission to Oral
Questions H-0009/02, H-0031/02 and H-0040/02 by Mr Sjöstedt, Mr Gahrton and Mr Schmidt
respectively at the Question Time of the first February 2002 (1) part-session of Parliament.

(1) Written answer of 5 February 2002.

(2002/C 172 E/165)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0159/02

by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Commission

Subject: Protection of the environment in the Po Delta

(4 February 2002)

The creation of a regional park in the Po Delta should, it was hoped, have ensured preservation of the
delicate equilibrium of a wetzone which is one of the largest in Europe and where over 300 bird species 4
including flamingos, cormorants, falcons, buzzards, black swans and mallards 4 find their natural habitat
among the salt canals and the sandbanks of the estuary.

C 172 E/158

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.7.2002

The area has already been declared a Special Protection Area (SPA) and a Site of Community Interest (SIC),
as well as a primary reproduction area for the heron community. Nonetheless, the fear continues to exist
that environmental degradation could result from urban or industrial development schemes, waste disposal
projects or the failure to convert a currently oil-based electric power station to methane.

In view of the above risks:

1. Can the Commission state whether it considers it necessary to monitor the situation closely and

ensure that the Community environmental legislation is properly applied?

2. Will the Commission remind the local authorities that the fact that this area has been granted the
status of Special Protection Area and Site of Community Interest entails obligations and duties as
regards the conservation of a resource which belongs to all the citizens of the Union?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(12 March 2002)

The Commission’s powers are limited to those conferred on it by the EC Treaty. In particular,
it is
responsible for ensuring that Community law is properly applied within all Member States. On the basis of
Article 211 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’. As the guardian of the EC Treaty, it does not hesitate to take all
necessary measures, including infringement procedures under Article 226 of the EC Treaty, in order to
ensure the observance of Community law.

In the Po Delta there are several Special Protection Areas (SPAs) designated under Council Directive
79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds (1) and Sites of Community Importance
(SCI) proposed by Italy under Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural
habitats and of wild fauna and flora (2). Article 6 of Directive 92/43/EEC provides for protection
requirements with reference to Special Conservation Areas (SCAs) and SPAs. These obligations apply to
all authorities of the Member States, at national, regional or local level.

However, the Commission is not in a position to assess issues concerning possible future situations of
breach of Community law, as raised by the Honourable Member. Future developments in the situations of
certain SPAs and SCAs cannot be considered falling under the responsibilities of the Commission acting as
the guardian of the EC Treaty. In addition, it would be stressed that situations claimed to be inconsistent
with Community legislation need to be precisely described so as to enable the Commission to assess them
in relation to relevant Community environmental law.

Therefore, on the basis of the information given by the Honourable Member, no breach of Community law
can be identified at present. Should the Honourable Member provide detailed information enabling the
Commission to assess the issues in relation to the above mentioned directives, the Commission would then
be able to investigate this matter.

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.
(2) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

(2002/C 172 E/166)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0161/02

by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Commission

Subject: Misleading information on Internet sites about melanoma

(4 February 2002)

On 17 January 2002 the Italian weekly ‘Panorama’ reported that, according to the results of a survey
published in the ‘Journal of Clinical Oncology’, the information given out about melanoma on many
Internet sites is incorrect or incomplete. The experts examined 76 sites and evaluated them according to
35 factors (basic information, incidence, risk factors, therapies, etc). Only eight of the factors were included