WRITTEN QUESTION E-1352/03 by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. The Morrazo super highway in Galicia.
Date: 2003-04-10
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Galicia, Structural Funds, application of EU law, environmental impact, expressway, impact study, road building

C 11 E/176

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

15.1.2004

(2004/C 11 E/200)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1352/03

by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(10 April 2003)

Subject: The Morrazo super highway in Galicia

Last September, in Written Question E-2581/02 (1), I set out the ‘serious social and economic problems
and damage to the environment and landscape’ which could be caused by the ‘envisaged route and
technical solutions adopted’, and the objections to the scheme submitted by thousands of Morrazo citizens;
I also raised various issues concerning different aspects of the scheme.

The Commission’s preliminary answer of 4 October 2002 said that the Commission was ‘collecting the
information it needs to answer the question’ and would ‘communicate its findings as soon as possible’. A
second reply of 18 February stated that the Spanish authorities had claimed that the environmental impact
study had been carried out in July 2002, and that the building of the highway would start between
December 2002 and February 2003, although in fact work has not yet begun. The environmental impact
study cited by the authorities is the very one rejected by the people of Morrazo, which is what gave rise to
my initial question. Furthermore, the Commission informs me that this impact assessment was never
received in Brussels, from which it can be inferred that the appropriate authorities,
i.e. the Galician
Government, failed to meet the provisions of Article 26 of Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 (2), obliging
them to provide ‘information allowing an evaluation to be made of the environmental impact and the
implementation of the precautionary principle and the principle that preventive action should be taken …’.

The Morrazo super highway is a monolithic project, which cannot be sub-divided by the public authorities,
totalling EUR 70 million in investment, well in excess of the EUR 50 million laid down in Article 25 of
Regulation 1260 as the threshold for the application of requirements concerning Article 26’s ‘information
allowing an evaluation to be made of
the
the environmental
precautionary principle and the principle that preventive action should be taken …’. Such information,
which must be submitted to the Commission, covers inter alia: risk assessment, socio-economic benefits,
foreseeable impact on the development of the region concerned, and information allowing an evaluation to
be made of the environmental impact, implementation of ‘the principles that preventive action should be
taken, that environmental damage should as a priority be rectified at source and that the polluter should
pay and compliance with the Community rules on the environment’.

impact and the implementation of

In the face of all these requirements not met by the Galician Government, plus the fact that the Galician
Government did not even submit the environmental impact assessment to the Commission and that the
deadline for starting work on the Morrazo super highway is already past, what (cid:1) necessarily urgent (cid:1)
steps does the Commission intend to take vis-à-vis the Galician Government with regard to meeting
Community legal requirements in response to the wishes of thousands of Galician citizens?

(1) OJ C 309 E, 12.12.2002, p. 235.
(2) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(2 June 2003)

In its answer of 18 February last to Written Question E-2581/02 on the same subject, the Commission
said the Spanish authorities intended to include in measure 6,1 (‘Carreteras y autovías’) of the Galicia
2000-2006 operational programme the building of such a road on the Morrazo peninsula, and, that the
‘major projects’ approval procedure of Article 26 of Regulation 1260/1999 (1) was applicable since the cost
involved exceeded EUR 50 million (Art. 25 of same Regulation).

On 23 April 2003 the Commission received the information required by that procedure and is currently
assessing the same in accordance with the relevant criteria.

15.1.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 11 E/177

The first paragraph of Article 26 says the Commission must be informed of such projects ‘in advance’, so
no expenditure relating to this project declared to the Commission can be reimbursed prior to a formal
decision being taken within the meaning of the third paragraph of the same Article.

Also, the Commission has received a number of complaints about the Morrazo project and the possible
mis-application of Community environmental law, leading to an exchange of information with the Spanish
authortiies. And this case featured on the agenda of the ‘package’ meeting on environment-related
complaints and infringement procedures held in Madrid on 3/4 April 2003. An enviromental impact study
has been carried out, with the Spanish authorities finding the project would not affect any site proposed
for inclusion in the Natura 2000 network. This matter is currently under examination by the Commission
in the light of all of the above.

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds

(OJ L 161, 26.6.1999).

(2004/C 11 E/201)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1353/03

by Daniela Raschhofer (NI) to the Commission

(3 April 2003)

Subject: Fiat works (cid:1) special EU subsidies

The Fiat works in Turin are to receive their own special EU subsidies towards developing the new
generation of Euro 4-class lorries.

In this connection:

1.

2.

3.

Is it true that the Fiat works in Turin are profiting from additional EU funds for the development of
Euro 4-class lorries?

If so, how does the Commission justify this action?

Is this decision to be seen in connection with the current discussion of the arrangement which is to
succeed the Austrian transit agreement and the planned exceptions for Euro 4-class lorries?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(16 May 2003)

In response to the first part of the question posed by the Honourable Member, the Commission is not
aware of any Union funds being given to Fiat for the specific purpose of developing heavy-duty vehicles
that satisfy the Euro 4 emission standard. The second and third parts of the question therefore do not
apply.

(2004/C 11 E/202)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1365/03

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(10 April 2003)

Subject: MEPs’ salaries and public confidence

There has been a long-standing debate within the EU concerning a change in the pay structure for MEPs.
A current proposal is that the present system, whereby MEPs receive the same salary as a member of the
respective national parliament, should be replaced by a system in which all MEPs would receive an average