WRITTEN QUESTION E-0287/02 by Monica Frassoni (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Project for the further development of the Gardaland theme park at Castelnuovo del Garda, Italy.
Date: 2002-02-08
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Veneto, environmental impact, environmental protection, impact study, leisure park, project evaluation, tourist infrastructure

18.7.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 172 E/175

field of consumer health and food safety (1), provides independent scientific advice as part of the risk
assessment exercise on potential risks to public health, animal health, animal welfare etc.
It is the
Commission’s policy not to interfere in this process in order to ensure that public trust in the transparency
and independence of the risk assessment exercise remains intact.

The Committee’s sub-committee on animal welfare established a working group with a mandate to prepare
a report on the welfare of animals kept for fur production, for submission to the sub-committee. It was
made clear to the working group, as is provided for in the Commission Decision, that it would be the
responsibility of the sub-committee to prepare and adopt a draft opinion with a final adoption of the
opinion by the Committee after review and possible amendment. This procedure was followed. After an in
depth examination of
the sub-committee adopted a draft opinion on
26 November 2001, with final adoption by the Committee on 12-13 December 2001. The Commission is
satisfied that the provisions of its Decision establishing the Scientific Committees and governing their
operation were followed.

the working group’s report,

Following the adoption of the opinion, a member of the Working Group, on behalf of six of the eight
members, sent a letter to the Commission and to the Scientific Committee on Animal Health and Animal
Welfare. The views expressed in the letter were discussed at the meeting of sub-committee on Animal
Welfare on 21 of January 2002 and in the meeting of the Scientific Committee on 5 February 2002. The
Committee decided to reply to the members of the working group and to publish on the Internet an
erratum (2) containing the modifications accepted by the Committee.

The Commission reserves the right to take the final decision on the appropriate follow-up action. This is in
accordance with the approach that whilst scientific risk assessment must be carried out independently and
transparently by Scientific Committees, risk management is a matter for the Commission and the other
Community institutions.
therefore decide whether
follow-up action, if any, is required and will submit any legislative proposals to the Member States and/or
the Parliament. The opinion of the Scientific Committee on Animal Health and Animal Welfare will be
taken into account in this process.

the Commission will

In the case of

fur farming,

(1) OJ L 237, 28.8.1997.
(2) http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/fs/sc/scah/outcome_en.html#opinions.

(2002/C 172 E/184)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0287/02

by Monica Frassoni (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(8 February 2002)

Subject: Project for the further development of the Gardaland theme park at Castelnuovo del Garda, Italy

Written question E-2653/00 (1) pointed out that the municipality of Castelnuovo del Garda (VR) had made
some alterations to the use of land envisaged in the current town-planning regulations in order to allow
the Gardaland theme park to be extended (General variant to the PRG of the municipality of Castelnuovo,
approved by the Veneto Region on 6 July 1999 by virtue of Regional Council Decree No 2340). One of
the alterations concerns conference zones D5 and 1, for which a project for the allocation of hotel
building-space was granted final approval on 24 October 2001 (Municipal Council Decision No 44).
Before the execution of this project no provision has been made for ascertaining the environmental impact
(screening), although it can be considered as belonging to one of the following categories: ‘theme parks’,
‘holiday villages and hotel complexes outside urban areas and associated developments’or’any change or
extension of projects listed in Annex I or Annex II, already authorised, executed or in the process of being
executed, which may have significant adverse effects on the environment’ (Directive 97/11/EC (2), Annex II).

The project make provision for building about 100 sq.m. of accommodation for use as hotel, conference
and recreational
linked to the Gardaland theme park in an area of high environmental
vulnerability, subject to great pressure as regards town-planning work.

facilities,

C 172 E/176

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.7.2002

It should be stressed that on 12 November 2001 the Union of Hotelkeepers on the Veronese shore of Lake
Garda published an appeal against the massive property speculation in the municipalities on the southern
part of Lake Garda, which is threatening nature in the area E the most precious resource for the local
tourist economy E for which the Veneto Region is in the process of adopting a special area plan (3).

Does the Commission intend to take steps to carry out an investigation (screening) to establish the need
for and environmental impact assessment of the Gardaland project in question?

(1) OJ C 136 E, 8.5.2001, p. 68.
(2) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997, p. 5.
(3) The guidelines for the Lake Garda Area Plan provided for in the Regional Development Master Plan, the most
important planning policy document in the Veneto (cf. Veneto Regional Council measure No 250/1991), clearly
stipulate that natural and landscape resources must be protected, and hence restrictions be imposed on building
work.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(21 March 2002)

The Commission considers that programmes and plans are not covered by Council Directive 85/337/EEC
of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of
the effects of certain public and private projects on the
environment (1), whether before or after amendment by Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997.

Should the plan be considered as substantially having the characteristics of a project, Directive 85/337/EEC
would apply. However, on the basis of the information given by the Honourable Member, at present, it
cannot be deduced that the plan for the allocation of hotel building-space approved on 24 October 2001
may be considered as a project.

In the light of the above, given the lack of specific grounds on the complaint on the application of the
above-mentioned environmental impact assessment (EIA) Directive to the specific cases, no breach of the
directive can be identified at present. Should the Honourable Member provide detailed information
enabling the Commission to assess the issues in relation to the EIA Directive, the Commission would also
be able to investigate this matter.

Under Directive 2001/42/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2001 on the assessment of
the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment (2), certain plans and programmes which
are likely to have significant effects on the environment are made the subject of an environmental
assessment. However, at present, Member States are not yet obliged to apply the provisions of this
directive. Deadline for Member States to bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative
provisions necessary to comply with this Directive is 21 July 2004.

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.
(2) OJ L 197, 21.7.2001.

(2002/C 172 E/185)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0291/02

by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(11 February 2002)

Subject: Animal experiments involving chimpanzees

Can the Commission confirm that the Biomedical Primate Research Centre in the Netherlands is the only
scientific research institution in the European Union which currently conducts experiments involving
chimpanzees? What rules are laboratories wishing to use chimpanzees or other advanced primates in
experiments required to follow and do the Member States have any treaty obligations in this area?
Specifically, is the Biomedical Primate Research Centre required to submit a specific request to the Dutch
authorities before beginning each research project explaining why it is not possible to use other animal
models, and what limits are placed on the suffering which chimpanzees and other primates are forced to
endure during the course of these experiments?