WRITTEN QUESTION E-3524/02 by Antonios Trakatellis (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Substandard building work in Greece — accidents in Kifisos and on the bridge at the Paiania intersection.
Date: 2002-12-10
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU control, European Anti-fraud Office, Greece, building regulations, financing, fraud, project evaluation, public works

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?

C 155 E/164

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.7.2003

3. How could the Commission ensure the quality of public works jointly funded by the EU at the stage

before construction?

4. By what other method or what other means could the Commission act to ensure transparency, the
reliability of the system for executing the works and the avoidance of substandard work in Greece, the
consequence of which may be to endanger the lives of members of the public?

5. Has the special committee for monitoring Community projects (ESPEL) submitted reports which have

identified substandard work in Greece and, if so, have the relevant sanctions been imposed?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(27 January 2003)

The matter of imposing sanctions in the light of accidents or other events is a responsibility which

1.
lies in the hands of the national authorities. The Commission is not informed of such matters.

2.
The detailed list of construction projects carried out in Greece and cofinanced by Community funds,
for which substandard work has been detected, is established and held by the competent services of the
Member State. The European Anti Fraud Office (OLAF) is kept informed by the national authorities about
matters relating to the misuse of Community funds including construction projects where serious faults
have been detected and which cannot be repaired without partially or totally reconstructing the project
(so-called category iii projects).

As provided for in the third Community Support Framework (2000-2006), the Greek authorities
3.
prepared an action plan in 2002 for the next steps towards improving public works, which provides also
for a radical reform to improve the design system. This reform should further contribute to the
improvement of the quality of public works, when implemented. The Commission is preparing its
comments on these proposals and will forward it shortly to the Greek government.

An enhanced national system to control the quality of public works executed or under way should also be
an important part of this effort. The Commission wrote to the Greek authorities in December 2002 asking
to be informed about the new Ministerial Decision which is being prepared to govern quality control
procedures.

4.
Although the primary responsibility lies with the national authorities, the Commission services
maintain a system of individual on-the-spot checks on projects cofinanced by Community funds in Greece.
The objective is to ensure that Community resources are used correctly in accordance with the regulation
in force.

The Quality Control Consultant (ESPEL) submits its reports to the competent Greek authorities. In
5.
the light of the reports of ESPEL,
it is the role of these authorities to decide the measures that are
necessary, including sanctions, where this is required by legislation in force. The European Anti Fraud
Office is regularly informed by the Greek authorities on ESPEL findings for category iii projects and their
follow-up.

(2003/C 155 E/183)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3534/02

by Brice Hortefeux (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(3 December 2002)

Subject: Linguistic diversity

Cultural and linguistic diversity is often put forward as one of Europe’s major strong points. The Union’s
hallmark is multilingualism, unlike any other world power, today or yesterday, all of which were based on
a common, if not actually a single language. The EU currently has 11 official languages.