WRITTEN QUESTION E-1045/02 by Raina Echerer (Verts/ALE) to the Council. New Residence Act in Austria and the Schengen Agreement.
Date: 2002-04-17
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Austria, Schengen Agreement, application of EU law, integration of migrants, interpretation of the law, linguistic discrimination, removal, rights of aliens

C 309 E/76

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

12.12.2002

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(6 June 2002)

Community environmental legislation will apply in the candidate countries only from accession onwards.
However, the Commission strongly encourages candidate countries to apply and implement the provisions
of the environmental acquis during the pre-accession period.

As long as candidate countries have not yet prepared their lists of sites of Community importance in order
to establish the Natura 2000 network, the following types of sites shall be regarded as environmentally
sensitive areas in the field of nature protection: sites listed in the latest inventory on Important Bird Areas
(IBA) for candidate countries and, if available, equivalent more detailed scientific inventories endorsed by
national authorities; wetlands of international
importance designated under the Ramsar Convention or
qualifying for such protection; areas to which the Bern Convention on the conservation of European
wildlife and natural habitats applies, in particular sites meeting the criteria of the Emerald network; areas
protected under national nature conservation legislation.

In cases where Community pre-accession funding for large infrastructure developments is concerned,
similar standards to those set by Community environmental legislation need to be applied before any
Community funding can be granted to the candidate countries. This involves, inter alia, the application of
Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private
projects on the environment (1). In addition, the candidate country will also have to investigate whether
environmentally sensitive areas are affected which might fall in future under the protection of Council
Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and
flaura (2) or Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds (3).

If the project has a significant negative impact on the site, the Commission requests the candidate country
to provide evidence that alternatives have been studied, on the reasoning why the proposed project has
been maintained and on the means that will be taken to compensate the negative impact. Only if all
relevant information has been provided will a project be eligible for the Instrument for Structural Policy
for Pre-Accession (ISPA) funding and can be approved by the Commission.

The design of the TINA network has not yet incorporated the strategic environmental evaluation in as
much as no recommended and approved methodology is yet available. However, rules to respect areas
already identified as ecologically sensitive have been applied. Since then, methods of analysis to carry out
the strategic environmental evaluation of transport infrastructure plans have been developed and tested,
particularly as part of the fourth framework programme for research and development and through pilot
studies of transport corridors.

Furthermore, as part of the forthcoming revision of guidelines for the trans-European transport networks
(TENs-T) planned for 2004 and announced in the White Paper on European transport policy up to 2010,
the projects identified by the TINA report are presumed to be incorporated into those networks. It is in
preparation for that revision that the Commission is preparing methods for the strategic environmental
evaluation of the TENs-T.

(1) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997.
(2) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.
(3) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.

(2002/C 309 E/087)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1045/02

by Raina Echerer (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(17 April 2002)

Subject: New Residence Act in Austria and the Schengen Agreement

The new draft Residence Act in Austria includes, inter alia, an integration aspect which provides that, after
a certain period of time has elapsed, foreigners of either sex may have their residence permits withdrawn
and may be deported unless they take advantage of an offer relating to their integration into society and,
within a certain period, successfully complete a German-language course.

12.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 309 E/77

Since refusal of a residence permit and deportation having the force of law in Austria would also apply to
nationals of the countries signatory to the Schengen Agreement, the new Residence Act might give rise to
a situation in which a person from a country where French is spoken might come to Austria, fail to learn
a sufficient amount of German and then, although speaking perfect French, not be permitted to return to
France under the Schengen Agreement.

Can the Council verify whether this depiction of the situation is accurate and whether this absurd

1.
example might be one of the consequences of the Austrian Residence Act?

Does the Council take the view that the new Residence Act could be implemented in the European

2.
Union and that it is compatible with its principles?

Reply

(30 September 2002)

The Council points out that it does not comment on draft legislation of the Member States.

The Honourable Member is also reminded that matters concerning immigration, visas and asylum fall
within Community competence by virtue of Title IV of the TEC. It is, therefore, for the Commission, as
guardian of the Treaties, to verify whether the Member States are fulfilling their obligations with regard to
these matters.

(2002/C 309 E/088)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1059/02

by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(17 April 2002)

Subject: Discrimination against family-run farms in Spain’s allocation of aid received from the EAGGF

Guarantee Section: the case of Galicia

Last year, EUR 6,2 billion of aid for Spanish agriculture was allocated from the EAGGF Guarantee Section.
In practice that aid, as in all previous years, was distributed in a highly discriminatory fashion since it
mainly benefited major producers and even the owners of large estates who live off their capital, have
huge fortunes and belong to the Spanish nobility (cid:1) whereas farming families living in rural areas are
marginalised. Since the EAGGF Guarantee Section aid mainly goes to farms in arid areas which grow
oilseed plants, cereals, flax, cotton, tobacco, and so on, farmers in more humid areas who rear livestock for
meat or milk are marginalised twice over. This is the case with farmers in Galicia. Since Galicia is
remarkably suited to agriculture and to multifunctional rural development, it receives only 1 % of the
EUR 6,2 billion which Spain receives from the EAGGF Guarantee Section, whereas other Spanish regions
(essentially their large landholders) receive up to 30 % of the total.

What action is to be taken in order to ensure that the EAGGF Guarantee Section serves regional
development and social cohesion, in accordance with EU principles? What immediate compensation is
Galicia to receive?

Reply

(3 October 2002)

1.
The Council attaches great importance to the development of the rural environment. This issue
underlies the policy of diversification and development of rural areas that was confirmed by Agenda 2000.
The CAP approach is based on the idea that agriculture must be multifunctional and spread throughout
Europe and must enable a key contribution to be made to the vitality of rural life.