WRITTEN QUESTION E-0462/03 by Kyösti Virrankoski (ELDR) to the Commission. Action C-240/00 brought by the Commission against Finland before the Court of Justice.
Date: 2003-02-19
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Commission, Finland, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, environmental law, judgment of the Court (EU), protected area, protection of animal life

C 268 E/104

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

7.11.2003

More specifically:

(cid:1) The Contact Group Alternative Fuels, which was established by the Commission in June 2002,
following the announcement in the Communication on alternative fuels, consists of experts from
stakeholders, academia and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and has as mission to give advice
on the technical and economical basis for further developments in the field of alternative fuels for
road transport. The Contact Group has formed Topic Groups on natural gas and hydrogen,
respectively. An Interim Report will be submitted by end of March 2003. A further Progress Report
is foreseen for end 2003. The Group is co-ordinated and chaired by Directorate General Energy and
Transport. Representatives of other Commission services concerned are participating in its work.

(cid:1) The High Level Group on Hydrogen and Fuel Cells has been promoted by the Commission and was
established on 10 October 2002. The group, composed of senior stakeholders,
is assisted by the
Commission that provides the secretariat, and is managed by Directorate General Research and
Directorate General Energy and Transport in common. It has the objective to develop a broad and
long-term vision of a hydrogen economy. A report will be prepared by April 2003 and presented in
the frame of a large public conference mid June 2003.
the vision and
recommendations of the High Level Group may provide the basis for considering more specific
initiatives, such as a Technology Platform in the field of Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technologies.

is expected that

It

(cid:1) Research and Development Framework Programme projects on renewable energy sources and
alternative fuels are co-ordinated and managed by Directorate General Research and Directorate
General Energy and Transport in common. A large number of research and demonstration projects as
well as studies on alternative fuels and renewable energy sources are funded through the Research and
Technological Development Framework Programme and the Energy Framework Programme/Intelligent
Energy for Europe. The world’s largest hydrogen demonstration project in the automotive sector,
CUTE, comprises 27 hydrogen powered buses in nine European cities, to start with the first bus
delivery to Madrid in May 2003.

(cid:1) Directorate General Environment has launched a study on renewable fuels for cross border
transportation in June 2002. The final report will be delivered mid-April 2003. The other Commission
services involved in alternative fuels have participated in preparation and guidance of the study.

(cid:1) In addition, the Directorate General Environment is preparing work on the review of fuel quality
specifications, including alternative fuels, as a part of the implementation of the recently amended
Directive 98/70/EC. For this purpose it is planned to set up still in 2003 an expert group on fuel
quality.

(1) COM(2001) 547.
(2) COM(2000) 769.
(3) COM(2001) 370.
(4) OJ C 103 E, 30.4.2002.

(2003/C 268 E/105)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0462/03

by Kyösti Virrankoski (ELDR) to the Commission

(19 February 2003)

Subject: Action C-240/00 brought by the Commission against Finland before the Court of Justice

On 15 June 2000 the Commission brought an action (Case C-240/00) against Finland before the Court of
Justice for failure to fulfil obligations under Directive 79/409/EEC on the conservation of wild birds and
their habitats (1). The Advocate-General put forward his proposed solution on 25 April 2002, but there is
still no word of a final decision.

1. What is delaying the final judgment in the case?

2. What steps will the Commission take to enable a decision to be reached as quickly as possible?

7.11.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 268 E/105

Has Finland supplied the explanations that the Commission requested, among other things regarding

3.
the complete list of special protection areas and the necessary geographical information?

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979, p. 1.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(3 April 2003)

1.
The judgement of the European Court of Justice in Case C-240/00 Commission against Finland was
delivered on 6 March 2003. The Court found that Finland has, by failing to classify fully and definitively
the special protection areas (SPAs) in its territory, failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 4(1) and (2) of
Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds.

The Commission will take the necessary measures to ensure that Finland complies with the above

2.
judgement.

3.
The list of SPAs that Finland has submitted is not yet final nor complete, as it lacks several territories
most suitable for designation as SPAs on the basis of ornithological criteria. This prevents the Commission
from taking the appropriate measures in accordance with Article 4(3) of Directive 79/409/EEC, for the
purpose of the co-ordination necessary to ensure that SPAs form a coherent whole.

(2003/C 268 E/106)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0480/03

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(17 February 2003)

Subject: Obsolete pesticides

In her answer to Written Question E-1951/02 (1), the Commissioner with special responsibility for the
environment said: ‘Although there may indeed be very large quantities of obsolete pesticides in Central and
Eastern Europe, requests for Community financial assistance for the destruction of obsolete pesticides have
been very limited. None of the candidate countries has so far during the accession negotiations raised the
destruction of obsolete pesticides as an issue. In fact, it is the Accession Countries who have to take the
initiative.’ On 4 December 2002, 28 MEPs signed a letter concerning such ‘forgotten’ pesticides which was
sent to all those responsible for environmental policy in all the applicant countries. In that letter, reference
was made to the answer to Written Question E-1951/02. The addressees were asked to contact the
Commission with a view to discussing the possibility of assistance being granted for the destruction of
such obsolete pesticides.

Can the Commission indicate which applicant countries have already established contact in connection
with this issue, and does the Commission feel that, given the facts of the case, it should also take the
requisite steps to contact the applicant countries on its own initiative?

Can the Commission indicate whether the applicant countries now have available the appropriate thermal
incinerators required for the destruction of such obsolete pesticides, and can it confirm, on the basis of
that information, that the obsolete pesticides in the applicant countries will, therefore, not be incinerated
in plants located on the territory of the current Member States?

Is the Commission aware of the problems caused by obsolete pesticides, and can it indicate what measures
it is taking to convince the applicant countries of the absolute need to do something about them?

(1) OJ C 28 E, 6.2.2003, p. 159.