WRITTEN QUESTION E-0355/03 by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Allegations concerning Greek carriers.
Date: 2003-02-12
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Greece, application of EU law, competence of the Member States, international road transport, restriction on competition, road cabotage, transport company, transport regulations

C 242 E/120

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

9.10.2003

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(4 March 2003)

The ‘ISPA Regulation’ (1) authorises the use of public procurement procedures that traditionally apply to
cases involving Community assistance.

Funding provided by the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) often contributes to
financing large ISPA projects in the environment sector in the countries concerned including Romania and
Poland. The opening to EBRD procurement rules is only granted to the parts financed through the EBRD
loan. EBRD rules are not applied to the part of the project that is financed under ISPA.

EBRD procurement policies and rules follow international standards and are based on principles similar to
those applying to Community rules, namely, non-discrimination, fairness and transparency. They are in
line with the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) agreement on government procurement.

For technical reasons, the EBRD is unable to apply Community procurement rules applicable to external
aid which are, in any event, relatively untested for large work tenders.

EBRD is an essential source of co-financing, without which it would not have been possible to realise
many large projects, especially in the environmental sector, in many Central and Eastern Europe countries.
This explains why the ISPA Regulation was modified in order to establish the legal basis to allow the
application of EBRD procurement rules (or those of other international financing sources that co-finance
ISPA measures).

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 2382/2001 of 4 December 2001 amending Regulation (EC) No 1267/1999 establishing

an Instrument for Structural Policies for Pre-Accession (cid:1) OJ L 323, 7.12.2001.

(2003/C 242 E/123)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0355/03

by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(12 February 2003)

Subject: Allegations concerning Greek carriers

The Hellenic Federation of International Road Transport Operators alleges that some Greek carriers are
mounting operations in a foreign country of their choice in order to obtain an authorisation there to
pursue the occupation of road transport operator, together with approval for registration of their goods
vehicles.

Specifically, they rent offices, nominate a location as their headquarters, have the required books and data
certified and fulfil any additional requirements in the country of establishment with the aim of obtaining
registration documents, plates and Community level 5 permits for their lorries. To conclude the procedure,
they leave the country, discontinuing all the above-mentioned activities, and return to Greece, their real
country of establishment. With lorries which are not registered in Greece, they operate both international
and national transport illegally. In addition, it appears that they do not pay income tax, road tax or other
taxes in any country, that their books and other data cannot be checked, since these are not kept in the
undertaking’s head office, and that checks cannot be carried out to verify whether the technical checks
have been completed.

Does the Commission have any information confirming these allegations? What steps does it intend to
take to verify the facts and to combat the phenomenon, if it is proved to exist?

9.10.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 242 E/121

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(14 March 2003)

The Commission is aware of the situation reported by the Honourable Member.

if carried out in
The Honourable Member refers in particular to cabotage operations that are lawful
accordance with Council Regulation (EEC) No 3118/93 of 25 October 1993 (1). Article 1(1) of
this
Regulation provides that any road haulage carrier for hire or reward who is a holder of the Community
authorisation provided for in Regulation (EEC) No 881/92 (2) must be entitled to operate on a temporary
basis national road haulage services for hire or reward in another Member State.

It is the task of the national authorities to verify compliance with the Community rules on access to the
road transport market and to put an end to any illegal practices. According to the information at the
Commission’s disposal, the Greek authorities are taking action to this effect.

(1) Council Regulation (EEC) No 3118/93 of 25 October 1993 laying down the conditions under which non-resident

carriers may operate national road haulage services within a Member State (cid:1) OJ L 279, 12.11.1993.

(2) Council Regulation (EEC) No 881/92 of 26 March 1992 on access to the market in the carriage of goods by road
within the Community to or from the territory of a Member State or passing across the territory of one or more
Member States (cid:1) OJ L 95, 9.4.1992.

(2003/C 242 E/124)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0360/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(12 February 2003)

Subject: Rome urban planning scheme

On 18 June 2002 Rome City Council approved the new general urban planning scheme which, however,
far from providing an opportunity to improve conditions in the city, is yet another example of exploiting
land and damaging the environment. The scheme envisages a 20 % increase in construction work, using
70 million cubic metres of concrete, thereby flouting the rule on proportionality between volume of
building and population, or the ratio between incentives for building work and the provision of services. In
actual fact Rome’s population is 2,4 million, not 5 million as stated in the scheme, but despite this no
provision has been made for adequate facilities, which are currently lacking, such as sewerage systems,
pipelines, water supply, lighting and city transport. The least appropriate aspect is the heavy involvement
of areas in the city’s hinterland and the acquisition, for this purpose, of large tracts of agricultural land for
building, which will damage the historical and archaeological heritage, the environment and farming. In
addition to this speculative building work, there are also the remaining elements of the existing Urban
Parking Plan (PUP), which, because of its dangerous environmental impact, was the subject of a previous
question by the same author (25 July 2000) and the Commission’s answer (P-2518/00 (1)), in which it
stressed precisely that the ‘possible cumulative effects of different projects should be sufficiently taken into
account’. In this context it should be emphasised, in the light of recent Court of Justice case-law (inter alia
Case C 319/01 (cid:1) Commission v Belgium and C 348/01 (cid:1) Commission v France) that another city traffic
scheme (PGTU) presenting a high environmental risk is being carried out in Rome. A further irregularity in
the urban planning scheme concerns the consultation and participation of the public which, according to
Article 3(7) and Article 6(5) of Directive 2001/42/EC (2) should always be involved, together with the
relevant authorities, when decisions concerning environmental impact are taken. On the contrary, Rome
City Council received the details of the scheme ten days after its adoption, and thus only had a few weeks
to consider them, formulate proposals and subject the scheme for appropriate consideration and debate.