WRITTEN QUESTION P-1566/02 by Freddy Blak (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Conflict of interest in DG-Transport.
Date: 2002-05-28
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU financing, European Commission, European official, Greece, business ethics, duties of civil servants, trans-European network

5.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 301 E/181

position at Community level with regard to the aspects of waste avoidance and exploitation of waste, both
of which are duly promoted and facilitated under the terms of Community environmental legislation.

(1) OJ L 194, 25.7.1975, as amended by Council Directive 91/156/EEC of 18 March 1991 (OJ L 78, 26.3.1991) and

Commission Decision 96/350/EC (OJ L 135, 6.6.1996).

(2) See Cases C-418/97 and 419/97 ARCO Chemie Nederland Ltd [2000] ECR I-4475 (especially paragraphs 83-88 of
judgment of 18.4.2002 (not yet reported) at paragraph 32 of

judgment) and Case C-9/00 Palin Granit Oy,
judgment.

(3) Entry ‘10 02 02 unprocessed slag’ of Commission Decision 2000/532/EC of 3 May 2000 replacing Decision
94/3/EC establishing a list of wastes pursuant to Article 1(a) of Council Directive 75/442/EEC on waste and Council
Decision 94/404/EC establishing a list of hazardous waste pursuant to Article 1(4) of Council Directive 91/689/EC
on hazardous waste (OJ L 226, 6.9.2000) as amended by Commission Decision 2001/118/EC (OJ L 47, 16.2.2001),
Commission Decision 2001/119/EC (OJ L 47, 16.2.2001) and Council Decision 2001/573/EC (OJ L 203,
28.7.2001).

(4) Entry ‘GC 070 ex 261900 Slags arising from the manufacture of iron and carbon steel (including low alloy steel)
excluding those slags which have been specifically produced to meet both national and relevant international
requirements and standards’ (this entry covers the use of such slags as a source of titanium dioxide and vanadium)
in Annex II of Council Regulation (EEC) No 259/93 of 1 February 1993 on the supervision and control of
shipments of waste within, into and out of the European Community (OJ L 30, 6.2.1993).

(5) See in particular Articles 4 and 8 of Directive 75/442/EEC.
(6) Case C-9/00 Palin Granit Oy, supra. at paragraphs 47-49 of judgment.

(2002/C 301 E/192)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1566/02

by Freddy Blak (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(28 May 2002)

Subject: Conflict of interest in DG-Transport

The Commission adopted in September 2001 a Decision (C (2001) 2654) establishing an Indicative
Multiannual Programme for the granting of Community Financial Aid to TEN transport projects for the
period 2001-2006. One of the chosen priorities is a Greek motorway, Via Egnatia (priority no 7).
According to the Decision one of the selected beneficiary entities is Egnatia S.A., which is chaired and
directed by the husband of the competent Head of Unit under the instructions of whom the financial
assistance is supervised.

Will the Commission agree that there is a serious conflict of interest?

Can the Commission inform the Parliament of the following:

(cid:1) How much EU funding was given to this project in 2001 and in 2002?

(cid:1) What is the backing national decision for providing the 50 % national contribution?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(25 June 2002)

The Indicative Multiannual Programme (IMP) to which the Honourable Member refers was adopted by the
Commission on 19 September 2001 in accordance with the provisions of Council Regulation (EC)
No 2236/95 of 18 September 1995 laying down general rules for the granting of Community financial aid
in the field of trans-European networks (1) as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1655/1999 of the European
Parliament and of the Council of 19 July 1999 (2).

For the period 2001-2006 the IMP includes EUR 30 million for studies and technical support measures for
the Egnatia section of priority project No 7 (PATHE-EGNATIA), part of the trans-European transport
network (TEN-T). In response to an application made by the Greek Ministry of the Economy, following the
Commission’s analysis and the usual comitology procedure, financial aid under the 2001-2006 TEN-T
budget was fixed in indicative terms in the IMP. The beneficiary is the Greek Minister for the Economy.
Egnatia Odos SA is the project manager.

C 301 E/182

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

5.12.2002

In 2001, EUR 12,5 million were allocated under the programme to this project. No decision has yet been
taken on the annual allowance for 2002 (EUR 12 million).

The EU contribution is based on participation up to 50 % of the estimated costs. The request from the
Ministry must guarantee that the remaining 50 % is funded by the Greek authorities. When making
payments, the Commission will check that the EU contribution is not more than the authorised 50 % of
the cost of the project and that the overall amount is not exceeded in decisions regarding annual amounts
allocated.

The construction project has also received funds from the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF),
the Cohesion Fund and loans from the European Investment Bank (EIB).

The Egnatia highway project is managed by Egnatia Odos SA, a company owned by the Greek State
(Ministry of the Environment, Planning and Public Works). The company was set up, after negotiation with
the Commission, under Community Support Framework II.

The Commission wishes to inform the Honourable Member that it is already aware of the situation he
reports. In response to a request from the Directorate-General for Energy and Transport, an administrative
inquiry into the matter was instigated on 20 March 2001, with the agreement of the Head of Unit
concerned.

For the duration of the inquiry, any questions on the project in question will be dealt with by the official
responsible for TEN-T projects for Greece, who will report directly to the competent director. The head of
unit mentioned in the question is not, therefore, in charge of managing or monitoring the project.

(1) OJ L 228, 23.9.1995.
(2) OJ L 197, 29.7.1999.

(2002/C 301 E/193)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1570/02

by Elisabeth Schroedter (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(4 June 2002)

Subject: Damage to the Elbe conservation area (Saxony-Anhalt) as a result of construction work

The Elbe in Saxony-Anhalt, Germany, constitutes a conservation area because of
its unique water
meadows. Fifty percent of a DEM 4,7 million EU LIFE project to promote the protection of these water
meadows during the period 1998-2002 was funded by the EU. In spite of this, construction work at a total
cost of EUR 200 million is being carried out on the river. This includes what is referred to as maintenance
work (approximately 75 % of the cost) with the aim of increasing the depth of the Elbe’s navigable channel
from 1,40 metres to 1,60 metres and extension work in the area of the Magdeburg Domfelsen (75 %
ERDF-funded) to increase the depth of the channel at Magdeburg to 2 metres.

1.

(a)

Is the Commission aware that, despite objections from environmental authorities and environ-
mental protection associations during the EIA process, the ERDF-funded extension work has now
started and will result in a drop in water level, which will indirectly cause irreversible damage to
the water meadows of the Elbe (conservation status) as a result of dessication?

(b)

If so, what steps has the Commission already taken to prevent this?

2.

(a)

Is the Commission aware that approximately 100 km of the river course in the conservation area
is being deepened as a result of what is referred to as maintenance work on the basis of plans and
authorisations dating from the 1930s, which means that the protected water meadows are being
damaged without an impact assessment having been carried out for the conservation area?