WRITTEN QUESTION E-2482/02 by Peter Skinner (PSE) to the Commission. Proposed construction of an airport at Cliffe Marshes, UK.
Date: 2002-09-06
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: United Kingdom, air transport, airport, environmental impact, environmental law, protected area, trans-European network, transport policy

6.3.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 52 E/177

The Honourable Member can be assured that the Commission is aware of the judgement of the Court of
Justice in case C-67/97. The outcome of the investigations depends indeed on the extent to which this case
law can be applied to the present complaints.

A final decision will be taken by the Commission in mid-October with regard to both complaints (98/
4010 and 98/4826).

(2003/C 52 E/195)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2482/02

by Peter Skinner (PSE) to the Commission

(6 September 2002)

Subject: Proposed construction of an airport at Cliffe Marshes, UK

The UK Government’s Department of Transport has opened a national consultation procedure on the
Future Development of Air Transport in the United Kingdom: South-East.

One of the proposals set out in the document involves the construction of a new International Airport at
Cliffe Marshes, Medway, South-East England. I have received many letters of concern from my Constituents
regarding this proposal.

The Marshes are a Ramsar Site, SSSI site and a protected site included in the EC Habitats Directive.

I should be grateful to hear the views of the Commission on the construction of an International Airport
on the above site.

What powers does the EU Commission have to deter Member States from developing such sites?

What authorisation is required from the Commission for this development to proceed?

What would be the implications for the UK Government if they proceeded with the development?

I should be grateful for a prompt response.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(17 October 2002)

The Commission is aware that the United Kingdom is considering the construction of a new international
airport at Cliffe as one of its possible options for the future development of air transport in the South East
of England.

the Parliament and of

the Council of 23 July 1996 (1) establishes the
Decision No 1692/96/EC of
guidelines covering the objectives, priorities and broad lines of measures envisaged in the area of the trans
European transport network. These guidelines identify projects of common interest, the implementation of
which should contribute to the development of the network throughout the Community. The trans-
European airport network comprises airports, which should comply with the criteria set out in the
guidelines. According to the South East Consultation Document, the Cliffe airport demand is predicted to
be 58 million passengers per year in 2015 and in this respect the airport can be characterised as an
international connecting point.

In view of Article 8 of the guidelines, environmental legislation on Community level should be taken into
account when projects related to airports of common interest are developed and carried out.

C 52 E/178

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

6.3.2003

The Cliffe Marshes form part of the Thames Estuary and Marshes Special Protection Area (SPA), classified
under Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds (2). Therefore, any
development of an airport that may adversely affect this site would only be possible if it was in conformity
with the procedural and substantive safeguards laid down in Article 6(3) and (4) of Council Directive 92/
43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (3), which
apply to all SPAs.

This would require an environmental assessment of the proposed development, with particular regard to
its potential effects on the nature conservation values of the SPA. If this assessment shows that significant
damage to the SPA would occur then it would only be permissible to proceed in the absence of alternative
solutions and where there is an overriding public interest. In such cases it would be necessary to put in
place compensation measures to offset the loss of habitat that would arise from the development.

As the development of an airport is a matter that falls under national competence there is no prior
authorisation required from the Commission.

(1) OJ L 228, 9.9.1996.
(2) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.
(3) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

(2003/C 52 E/196)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2485/02

by Rosa Miguélez Ramos (PSE) to the Commission

(6 September 2002)

Subject: Possible dumping by aquaculture enterprises

the aquaculture industry in Spain, France,

Representatives of
Italy and Portugal have drawn the
Commission’s attention to the dumping practised by Greek aquaculture enterprises, who are accused of
selling their products at prices which do not reflect their real costs and thus jeopardising the survival and
the production of other enterprises in the Community, especially in the case of sea-bass and John Dory.

The Association of Maríne Aquaculture Producers (Apromar, Spain), the French Maríne Aquaculture
Society, the Portuguese Aquaculture Producers’ Association and the Italian Aquaculture Association have
all complained at the fact that Greece’s aquaculture enterprises, which produce some 60 000 tonnes
(or tenfold the total consumption level on the national market), export their surplus to the remaining
Member States at artificially low prices.

Has the Commission investigated the matter?

What measures does it intend to adopt?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(7 October 2002)

The Commission is informed of the reducing average market prices of seabass and seabream in 2001 and
is closely following this issue.

According to the data available from Globefish (Food and Agricultural Organisation), both species average
prices fell gradually from January to November 2001, reaching very low minima during the period
September-November 2001. However the prices of both species started recovering in December 2001 and
this trend continued in 2002. The average price of seabass in July 2002 was approximately 20 % higher
than in November 2001, the average price of seabream increased by approximately 35 % over the same
period.

The Commission did not receive formal complaints with regard to the Greek producers’ commercial
behaviour, nor until now any evidence corroborated the allegations of
these
producers

irregular practices of