WRITTEN QUESTION E-2036/03 by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission. Treaty on Austrian accession to the EU.
Date: 2003-06-18
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Austria, EU Accession Treaty, EU environmental policy, reduction of gas emissions, sustainable mobility, transport policy

6.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 58 E/125

Major research projects are currently underway to assess these impacts. Retrievability of the waste is a
natural result of the ‘concentrate and contain’ strategy employed in radioactive waste management. What is
crucial is that any measures to enhance retrievability do not compromise overall safety.

The Commission places the highest priority on safety, and disposal is the only option capable of
4.
guaranteeing long-term safety and protection of the environment. Individual differences between Member
States were not specifically addressed in the current proposals, but the Commission considers there is
adequate flexibility in its measures to allow all Member States to find appropriate solutions. With regards
to the Dutch sub-soil, the PAGIS study mentioned above indicated the existence of suitable salt deposits.

5.

Yes.

6.
The Commission considers that the current proposals already offer significant flexibility to allow for
differences between Member States. The Commission has made it clear that it is ready to continue the
discussions on its proposals with the Member States in the Council to see if such flexibility might be
further enhanced.

(1) COM(2003) 32 final.
(2) Performance assessment of geological isolation systems.

(2004/C 58 E/141)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2036/03

by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission

(18 June 2003)

Subject: Treaty on Austrian accession to the EU

According to the Austrian Embassy, under the 1995 Treaty on Austrian accession to the EU Austria
received two guarantees from the Commission:

1.

2.

in order to improve air pollution, emissions would be reduced permanently by 60 %, and

a European framework guaranteeing a sustainable transport policy governing traffic for all of Europe
would be in place by the time that the agreement expired.

When does the Commission intend to put forward proposals for such legislation?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(16 July 2003)

When Austria joined the Union, the Council asked the Commission to propose the adoption of a
framework aimed at resolving the environmental problems caused by heavy good vehicles (see Declaration
34 annexed to the Adhesion Act of Austria).

With a view to implementing this framework, the Commission presented a working document (1) and
proposals, inter alia, in the area of road charging and railway policy.

As far as road charging is concerned, a proposal for a Directive on the charging of heavy goods vehicles
for the use of certain infrastructures (2) was put forward, which became the so-called ‘Eurovignette-
Directive’ (3). This proposal contained amongst other things the possibility for Member States to apply
higher rates in sensitive areas. This and other novel aspects of the proposal were, however, not adopted by
the Community legislator.

As far as railway policy is concerned, the Commission presented in the late 1990s the first railway
package, which was adopted in 2001 and presented a second railway package in 2002, which is now
being debated in the Council and Parliament.

C 58 E/126

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

6.3.2004

The Commission has therefore already followed up on the Council’s request, mentioned in Declaration 34
annexed to Austria’s Adhesion Act, and presented legislation in the relevant areas. Moreover the
Commission has presented in December 2001 a proposal for a prolongation of the ecopoints system (4)
which is now the subject of the conciliation procedure. Finally the Commission has the intention to
present shortly a new sectoral proposal for a Directive on charging for the use of road infrastructure
modifying the Eurovignette-Directive.

(1) COM(98) 444 final.
(2) OJ C 59, 26.2.1997.
(3) Directive 1999/62 EC of the Parliament and the Council of 17 June 1999 on the charging of heavy good vehicles
for the use of certain infrastructures, OJ L 187, 20.7.1999 replacing Council Directive 93/89/EEC of 25 October
1993, OJ L 279, 12.11.1993.

(4) OJ C 103 E, 30.4.2002.

(2004/C 58 E/142)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2046/03

by Anne Jensen (ELDR) to the Commission

(19 June 2003)

Subject: German road tax

The German Government has taken a decision to introduce a road tax (HGV toll). The introduction of a
unilateral German road tax will place hauliers from a number of European countries in a considerably
worse position than their European colleagues. Transit through Germany, for example, is essential for
haulage from Denmark and Sweden to the rest of Europe. With the introduction of a unilateral German
road tax, therefore, Danish and Swedish hauliers will be competitively worse off.

Does the Commission consider that this unilateral German road tax is consistent with EU competition
rules? Will the Commission seek a common European solution rather than accept unilateral national
taxation?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(18 July 2003)

Germany has notified to the Commission its intention to introduce a new road toll system for heavy goods
vehicles on German motorways. The Commission has written to the German authorities in order to assess
the compatibility of the system with Community law, and in particular with Directive 1999/62/EC (1) as
regards both the level of tolls and the other relevant aspects of the system. The issue is currently under
examination.

In any case the Commission will make sure that Community law is duly respected in the application of all
issues related to the new road toll system in Germany.

(1) Directive 1999/62/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 1999 on the charging of heavy goods

vehicles for the use of certain infrastructures, OJ L 187, 20.7.1999.

(2004/C 58 E/143)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2057/03

by Bartho Pronk (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(20 June 2003)

Subject: One and two eurocent coins

A scientific article which was recently published in the Netherlands (1) used Cramer’s algorithm to
demonstrate that a set of euro coins which did not include one and two cent coins was much more
efficient for cash payment transactions than the current set of euro coins. According to the article, an
efficient system for cash payment transactions is in the interests of consumers, shops, banks, industry and
the Central Banks.