WRITTEN QUESTION E-1754/03 by Elisabeth Schroedter (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Bridge linking the island of Rügen with the mainland, question E-0543/03.
Date: 2003-05-27
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Regional Development Fund, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, engineering structure, environmental impact, environmental protection, financing, island region, project evaluation

C 70 E/60

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

20.3.2004

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(25 July 2003)

As the Honourable Member points out,
numerous documents on the situation of stowaways, as well as that of persons in distress at sea.

the International Maritime Organization (IMO) has issued

It has come up against two barriers in this connection: first, the fact that the IMO documents are rarely
binding, and second, the fact that issues following on from the situation stowaways and persons of distress
at sea are matters for the sovereign decisions of national governments.

The Commission would point out that the Community is not a member of the IMO and that the
Commission has only observer status there, while the Member States are full members.

Nevertheless, under Article 5(1) of Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) No 2099/2002 of the European
of 5 November 2002 establishing a Committee on Safe Seas and the Prevention of Pollution from Ships
(COSS) and amending the Regulations on maritime safety and the prevention of pollution from ships (1),
‘… with a view to reducing the risks of conflict between the Community maritime legislation and
international
instruments, Member States and the Commission shall cooperate, through coordination
meetings and/or any other appropriate means, in order to define, as appropriate, a common position or
approach in the competent international fora’. However, this cooperation reaches its limits, in relation to
the question raised by the Honourable Member, as soon as issues of justice and home affairs are involved.

In the context of the control of external borders, immigration and asylum policy, the issue of stowaways is
a subject of importance owing to its humanitarian and economic consequences as described by the
Honourable Member. It should be noted, however, that in quantitative terms illegal immigration by sea
takes place in most cases with chartered boats organised by criminal networks, as the recent landings in
Italy also indicate.

Nevertheless, regardless of the method of transport, illegal immigration by sea gets serious and continuous
attention within the Commission, as already emphasised in the Commission’s reply to written questions
E-3112/02 by Mr Tannock (2) and P-0291/03 by Mr Pisicchio (3).

(1) OJ L 324, 29.11.2002.
(2) OJ C 155 E, 3.7.2003, p. 92.
(3) OJ C 280 E, 21.11.2003, p. 46.

(2004/C 70 E/063)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1754/03

by Elisabeth Schroedter (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(27 May 2003)

Subject: Bridge linking the island of Rügen with the mainland, question E-0543/03

In my question E-0543/03 (1) of 28 February 2003 I drew to the Commission’s attention the project to
construct a high-level bridge linking the island of Rügen with the mainland. The reason for my question
was my concern that protected areas forming part of Europe’s natural heritage could be permanently
encroached upon using ERDF money.

In its answer the Commission informed me that the financing of the bridge did not fall within the
Commission’s responsibility, as the German authorities had not requested assistance for the project under
EU funds. The implementation report on the OP in respect of the ERDF (infrastructure) shows expenditure

20.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 70 E/61

of EUR 23 400 for the B96n (new construction), part of which relates to the Rügen bridge. The Minister of
Economic Affairs for Mecklenburg-Vorpommern indicated, during a discussion with citizens on 2 April
2003 in Bergen, that the authorities did not propose to submit an individual application for financing for
the bridge to the Commission but an overall application for transport projects in general.

1.

(a)

Is the Commission aware that ERDF money has already gone into the above project?

(b) What is the Commission’s view of the provision of such assistance in the light of the circumstances set
out in my last question (fact that there is no need for the bridge, implausible financing plan, damage
to nature, bridge to stand in the middle of a route linking European protection areas for migratory
birds and seabirds)?

2.

(a) What is the Commission’s view of the wish of the Mecklenburg-Vorpommern authorities to
submit an overall application?

(b) Does the Commission intend to agree to such an application? If so, will

it ensure that projects

included in it are adequately examined?

3.
Has the Commission concluded, following its examination of the relevant documents, that the Federal
Republic of Germany is fulfilling its obligations under Council Directive 92/43/EEC (2) of 21 May 1992 on
the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora?

(1) OJ C 242 E, 9.10.2003, p. 144.
(2) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(17 July 2003)

The Commission is aware of plans to build a new bridge across the Ziegelgraben and Strelasund (cid:1) to the
west of the existing road-rail draw bridge. The new bridge is meant to be a suspension bridge arching over
the Ziegelgraben to allow ships to pass underneath. It connects two segments of the new federal road
B96n (cid:1) one between the A20 and Rügendamm (land side) and one between Altefähr and Bergen (on the
island of Rügen).

The authorities have confirmed that, following a request from the Commission, they are conducting an
additional assessment of the possible effects of the bridge on the movement of birds. The Commission has
not yet received the final report of this assessment and therefore cannot express an opinion on conformity
with the requirements of Community law.

Responsibility for the new bridge is entirely a matter for the authorities in Germany and no Community
funds are going into the bridge now or in the future.

The German Ministry of Transport, Construction and Housing submitted an application for the co-
financing of the new B96n road in 2002. The Commission has analysed the application and has asked the
authorities to provide details about their plans for the sustainable development and integrated transport
development of the island of Rügen and the adjoining region. The Commission has not yet completed its
examination of the dossier and the availability of Community support for the project has therefore not yet
been decided.

Any such examination must be carried out in accordance with Articles 25 and 26 of Council Regulation
(EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds (1).

(1) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.