WRITTEN QUESTION E-0068/03 by Monica Frassoni (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Failure to carry out an environmental impact assessment prior to implementation of part of the Is Arenas srl project.
Date: 2003-01-23
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU aid, Sardinia, aid system, application of EU law, building industry, environmental impact, infringement procedure (EU), project evaluation, protected area

7.11.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 268 E/67

The Commission would stress once again its determination to continue playing its part in mobilising the
Union to do all it can to combat the effects of the ‘Prestige’ disaster and to put in place a coherent and
comprehensive Union policy regarding the prevention aspects of maritime safety.

(2003/C 268 E/070)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0068/03

by Monica Frassoni (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(23 January 2003)

Subject: Failure to carry out an environmental impact assessment prior to implementation of part of the

Is Arenas srl project

By decision of 4 October 2002 (No 2309/VIII) of the Director of the SIVEA service of the environmental
protection department, the Sardinia Autonomous Region arbitrarily exempted the Is Arenas srl property
group, at the end of the ‘preventive verification’ procedure, from the environmental impact assessment
transposed in Italy by the
procedure provided for
presidential decree of 12 April 1996 and subsequent amendments and addenda and by Sardinian regional
law No 1/1999 and subsequent amendments and addenda, for the building of a tourist centre on the
wooded dunes of Is Arenas, in the commune of Narbolia (OR).

in Directives 85/337/EEC (1) and 97/11/EC (2),

This exemption concerns approximately 57 000 cubic metres of the overall project’s 222 900 cubic metres,
coming under the programme agreement of 9 June 1997 between the Sardinia Region and Is Arenas srl,
entirely located in the ‘Is Arenas’ SCI (code ITB 002228),
in relation to which specific infringement
proceedings (Case No 43/81/2001) have already been opened for violation of Directive No 92/43/EC (3)
and a reasoned opinion was issued on 9 February 2001. This measure only concerns part of the property
project and fails to consider it in its entirety.

Does the Commission intend to open new infringement proceedings, this time for blatant violation of the
directives on environmental impact assessments (85/337/EEC and 97/11/EC)?

Does the Commission consider it appropriate, almost two years after notification of the reasoned opinion
in the infringement proceedings (Case No 4381/2001), to bring an action before the Court of Justice, in
view of the Sardinia Autonomous Region’s clear refusal to consider the overall environmental impact of
the Is Arenas building project in an SCI area?

Would the Commission agree that the decision to contribute some EUR 5 million of Community funding,
through the Oristano Territorial Pact, to the Is Arenas SIL (local intermediary) and related companies
should be definitively annulled?

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40.
(2) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997, p. 5.
(3) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(7 March 2003)

In accordance with Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of
certain public and private projects on the environment, as amended by Council Directive 97/11/EC of
3 March 1997, Member States are obliged to ensure that, before consent is given, projects likely to have
significant effects on the environment by virtue, inter alia, of their nature, size or location are made subject
to a requirement for development consent and assessment of their effects. Projects covered by the Directive
are listed in the Annexes. The projects in Annex I are subject to environmental impact assessment. For
projects listed in Annex II, Member States are obliged to determine, through a case-by-case examination or
by setting criteria or thresholds, whether a project is to be made subject to environmental
impact
assessment.

C 268 E/68

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

7.11.2003

The project for building a tourist centre among the wooded dunes of Is Arenas, in the commune of
Narbolia, as referred to by the Honourable Member, falls under Annex II of Directive 85/337/EEC, as
amended. Therefore, the competent authorities should have determined, through a case-by-case examin-
ation or by applying criteria or thresholds set by Italian legislation, whether the project had to be made
subject to environmental impact assessment.

By decision No 2309/VIII of 4 October 2002 of the Environmental Protection Department of the Sardinia
Autonomous Region (SIVEA), to which the Honourable Member refers, it was decided, in the light of a
specific examination, that the proposed tourist centre in the wooded dunes of Is Arenas does not need to
undergo environmental impact assessment. It should be noted that the decision concerned the overall
project for 222 900 cubic metres under the programme agreement of 9 June 1997 between the Sardinia
Region and Is Arenas srl.

With regard to infringement procedure 1998/2346 concerning the proposed Site of Community
Importance ITB 032228 ‘Is Arenas’, the reasoned opinion does not cover the Is Arenas building project
but focuses only on the project for a golf course.

Therefore, in the light of the above and on the basis of the information given by the Honourable Member,
no breach of Directive 85/337/EEC, as amended, can be identified at present.

Lastly, with regard to the granting of Community assistance, following the opening of the abovementioned
infringement procedure, the Commission has asked the body responsible for implementing the Oristano
Territorial Pact, which receives European Regional Development Fund support, to suspend the support to
the project in question pending the outcome of the procedure. The Is Arenas tourist project has been
completely excluded from the Oristano Pact.

(2003/C 268 E/071)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0073/03

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(23 January 2003)

Subject: The impossibility and undesirability of rapid return of refugees to Afghanistan, where there is no

employment or housing for them

1.
Is the Commission aware that the Afghan Minister for Refugees and Repatriation, Enayatullah Nazari,
is travelling around the world advising fellow citizens who have fled from Afghanistan not to return there
for the time being, for the following reasons:
‘After 23 years of war, our country is destroyed, the
economy is paralysed, health services and agriculture are seriously damaged, there are more than six
million landmines in the ground, living conditions are impossible, there is no housing or employment, and
the government has only been in office for ten months and cannot possibly solve all these problems’?

2.
Can the Commission confirm the minister’s statement that some of the two million refugees who
have returned to Afghanistan have already fled again because the country is in no state to receive them
and that the lives of these people who have become refugees again are now endangered?

3.
Is the minister right to say that even highly qualified refugees should stay away for the time being
because they will be needed only when it is possible to start work on reconstruction with financial aid
from the international community?

4. What is the EU doing to ensure that Afghan refugees do not return on their own initiative to areas
which are currently regarded as ‘safe’ but where there is no employment or housing and where an increase
in the population would further increase the problems faced by the Afghan Government?

5. What will the Commission do to enable Afghan refugees to continue for the time being to reside in
EU Member States and to abandon the previous idea that 1500 refugees per month should depart to a
country which cannot receive them?

Source: ‘De Volkskrant’ (Dutch newspaper), 17 December 2002.