WRITTEN QUESTION E-0019/03 by Margrietus van den Berg (PSE) to the Commission. Contracting-out of train services in the Netherlands.
Date: 2003-01-20
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Netherlands, application of EU law, common transport policy, competition law, liberalisation of the market, public service, rail network, rail transport, service concession

C 222 E/134

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

18.9.2003

A major disaster within the meaning of the Fund means any disaster resulting in damage estimated either
at over EUR 3 billion in 2002 prices, or at more than 0,6 % of the GNI of the disaster struck Member
State.

However, exceptionally, even when these quantitative criteria are not met, assistance from the Fund may
also be mobilised in case a specific region or specific regions within a Member State are struck by an
extraordinary disaster affecting the major part of its population with serious and lasting repercussions on
living conditions and the economic stability of the region or regions affected. Assistance under this specific
provision may not exceed 7,5 % of the total annual budgetary resources of the Fund which are limited to
EUR 1 billion.

It is for the Member State concerned to initiate the relevant procedure by lodging an application for
assistance from the Fund to the Commission within ten weeks after the first damage caused by the disaster
in accordance with Article 4 of Regulation 2012/2002.

Therefore, the Council invites the Honourable Parliamentarian to address his question to the Commission.

(2003/C 222 E/157)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0019/03

by Margrietus van den Berg (PSE) to the Commission

Subject: Contracting-out of train services in the Netherlands

(20 January 2003)

In the Netherlands 31 train services shown by the current service provider, the Netherlands Railways (NS),
to be profitable are on a list of services being put to tender. In recent years the privatisation of the
Netherlands Railways has already caused major problems for passengers because of declining services.
Many people question the wisdom of this measure and wonder whether the Netherlands Railways do not
simply belong in public ownership.

Is it correct that current European legislation does not require the Netherlands to put 31 train

1.
services out to competitive tender?

2.
Is it not so that a balanced assessment would also have to take account of the necessary investment
in equipment in order to arrive at a sustainable approach and does the Commission consider that the
omission of this cost heading entails an unacceptable erosion of passenger services?

3. Would it not be better for the regions concerned (cid:1) such as the North, South and East Netherlands
where these services are extremely important in social, economic and accessibility terms (cid:1) to exempt the
services from being put out to tender for the time being or to agree on a reflection period during which
the primary consideration would be to safeguard the interests of passengers and the regions?

Is the Commission prepared to put this matter, which has already led to a deterioration in services
the

4.
and problems in many European regions, on the agenda for European transport ministers at
forthcoming Transport Council meeting?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(27 February 2003)

Except in the cases of public works concessions, i.e. contracts where the counterpart for the works to be
carried out consists fully or partly in the right to exploit the construction (1), the detailed rules foreseen by
the European public procurement directives for the award of public contracts do not apply to the cases
mentioned by the Honourable Member. However, if a contracting authority or a contracting entity decides
to grant contracts for railway transport to a third party, it has to respect the principles of the EC Treaty,
and in particular those of equality of treatment, non-discrimination and transparency. Concerning more
specifically the principle of transparency, according to consistent case law the ‘obligation of transparency

18.9.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 222 E/135

which is imposed on the contracting authority consists in ensuring, for the benefit of any potential
tenderer, a degree of advertising sufficient to enable the services market to be opened up to competition
and the impartiality of procurement procedures to be reviewed’ (2).

Furthermore, the Commission has proposed a Regulation on the granting of public service contracts for
public passenger transport in road, rail and inland waterways (3). In this proposal the Commission supports
mandatory tendering, with minor exceptions, of public service contracts in case of any financial
compensation to the operator or exclusive rights. The two main arguments for this proposal are that:
tendering of public services has proved to be an effective instrument for creating more attractive services
to passengers at lower costs to the taxpayer; and that the direct award of financial compensation or
exclusive rights for the provision of public transport services is vulnerable to legal challenge. Therefore,
although tendering as provided in the Regulation may not be mandatory at the moment, directly awarded
contracts are, in the Commission’s view, less desirable and legally vulnerable.

Public authorities organising a tender for rail public services should take into account the service quality
for passengers as is also stated in the Commission proposal. A request for investment could be part of that.

The Commission believes that tendering of rail services, especially regional rail services has given good
results up until now for the passenger. Experiments with tendering of public transport in the eastern part
of the Netherlands have proven to be successful, notably in terms of integration of bus and rail services.

The Commission has submitted a proposal concerning public service requirements in passenger transport,
and would favour further Transport Council debate at the earliest opportunity in order to make progress
on the dossier, and to allow the achievement of the objectifs of the Common Transport Policy as set out in
the White Paper European transport policy 2010: Time to decide (4).

see Court of Justice of the European Communities, case C-324/98, Telaustria.

(1) E.g. construction of a railway line and operation of it.
(2)
(3) OJ C 151 E, 25.6.2002.
(4) COM(2001) 370 final.

(2003/C 222 E/158)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0022/03

by Laura González Álvarez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(20 January 2003)

Subject: Environmental repercussions of the Agua Blanca mining project in Monesterio (Badajoz, Spain)

An opencast nickel mine, called Agua Blanca, is planned for Monesterio (Badajoz), in an area recognised as
a nature reserve of great ecological significance. In addition, there are plans for three reservoirs for waste
covering over 100 hectares and containing highly contaminating products. The project would create slag
heaps, destroy 350 hectares of woodland and necessitate the removal of over 40 million cubic metres of
earth. The environmental impact study did not fully appreciate the pristine state of the area and excluded
some of the most important species living there, such as the black stork, the Iberian lynx, the wild cat, the
mongoose, various types of bat, and the alytes obstetricansm, a variety of toad, as well as plants such as
the flueggea tinctoria, orchids etc., whilst citing some species which do not inhabit the area, such as the
stoat.

The mining project is an example of an unsustainable development, in both social and environmental
terms, which will wreak havoc on its natural surroundings, as happened in cases such as that of
Aznalcóllar. One of the main problems of the project is that if any of the contaminating substances escape
or filter out, they will end up in the Ribera de Cala, catalogued as water of importance to European
indigenous fish (protected under the Habitats Directive).