WRITTEN QUESTION P-3516/02 by Caroline Lucas (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Proposed airport on the North Kent marshes, UK.
Date: 2002-12-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: South East (England), air transport, airport, environmental impact, environmental protection, protected area, transport infrastructure

C 155 E/162

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.7.2003

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(8 January 2003)

A delegation from the Directorate-General for the Environment visited Greece on 15 November 2002 in
the framework of the ‘package’ meetings held between the Commission and the national authorities to
examine the application of Community legislation by the Member States. The purpose of these meetings
was to discuss and clarify matters relating to Community environmental legislation.

The agenda for the meeting covered a total of 21 complaints, 10 of which were concerned with
Directive 85/337/EEC on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the
environment (1), as amended by Directive 97/11/EC (2), 10 were concerned with nature conservation
(Directive 79/409/EEC (3) and 92/43/EEC (4)) and 1 concerned drinking water (Directive 80/778/EEC) (5).
It should be noted that the agenda did not include any matters relating to infringements.

The meeting took place in a constructive atmosphere. The Greek authorities took account of
the
Commission’s observations and demonstrated a willingness to find solutions to the questions and problems
raised. The information obtained during the meeting helped to shed light on all the complaints and will, as
far as most of the complaints are concerned, be transmitted to the Commission in writing.

in particular how to categorise them. However,

Analysis of this information will enable the Commission to decide what action to take on the various
complaints,
if an infringement of Community
environmental legislation is found, the Commission will not hesitate to take the appropriate measures,
including opening infringement procedures as provided for in Article 226 of the Treaty establishing the
European Community, in order to ensure that Community law is applied properly.

(1) Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private

projects on the environment (cid:1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.

(2) Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997 amending Directive 85/337/EEC on the assessment of the effects of

certain public and private projects on the environment (cid:1) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997.

(3) Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds (cid:1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.
(4) Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (cid:1)

OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

(5) Council Directive 80/778/EEC of 15 July 1980 relating to the quality of water intended for human consumption (cid:1)

OJ L 229, 30.8.1980.

(2003/C 155 E/181)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3516/02

by Caroline Lucas (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(3 December 2002)

Subject: Proposed airport on the North Kent marshes, UK

Is the Commission concerned about the UK Government’s proposal (1) for a new airport on the North Kent
marshes, centred on Cliffe, as one of its options for infrastructure expansion in South East England, given
the direct impact on the Thames Estuary and Marshes Special Protection Area (SPA) and Ramsar site, one
of the most important sites for waterfowl in the UK?

The Cliffe option, if adopted, would spell disaster for the birds and other wildlife of the Thames estuary.
It could be the largest ever loss of wildlife habitat and countryside to a single development.

Given that SPAs are protection areas designated under the Wild Birds Directive and Habitats Directive,
what action has the Commission taken vis-à-vis the UK Government?

3.7.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 155 E/163

Given that building new runways across the South East will do nothing to narrow the growing gap
between supply and demand for air travel, which is kept artificially high through massive public subsidies,
what steps does the Commission intend to take to address this imbalance?

(1) Department for Transport: The Future Development of Air Transport in the United Kingdom: South East, Summary

Consultation Document, July 2002.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(16 January 2003)

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 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 (1). 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 (2), 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.

In the context of the consultation exercise on future development of air transport in the United Kingdom
and in light of concerns that has been expressed about the possible construction of a new airport at Cliffe,
the Commission has written to the British authorities highlighting the need to take full account of the
protection requirements of Natura 2000 sites in further examination of the options for the development of
air transportation in the different regions of the United Kingdom.

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

(2003/C 155 E/182)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3524/02

by Antonios Trakatellis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(10 December 2002)

Subject: Substandard building work in Greece (cid:1) accidents in Kifisos and on the bridge at the Paiania

intersection

The findings of experts investigating the recent accidents in the Kifisos area and the collapse of the bridge
at the Paiania intersection, together with the faulty work on the Egnatia highway, have revealed that the
work was begun without either the construction companies or the Greek government engineers who were
supervising the works having carried out the required studies which were of such fundamental importance.

In view of the cases above and many more (cid:1) some 20 projects (cid:1) involving substandard work, will the
Commission say:

1. What sanctions have been imposed by the Commission against those responsible for the above
accidents, which were due to faulty work detected in projects under the 2nd Community Support
Framework, and what sanctions have been imposed on the contractors for the above works?

2. Does the Commission have a detailed list of the building projects carried out in Greece with

Community funds in which substandard work has been detected?