WRITTEN QUESTION E-2451/03 by Margrietus van den Berg (PSE) to the Commission. Habitats Directive areas and Natura 2000.
Date: 2003-07-23
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Netherlands, environmental protection, infringement procedure (EU), national implementing measure, natural gas, offshore drilling, protected area, town and country planning

26.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51 E/249

The advantages and drawbacks of this system have been discussed on several occasions in public fora.
There is one critical point, however. For this new approach to be as effective as possible, the national
competition authorities must function extremely well.

Does the Commission have oversight over the way in which the national competition authorities function?
If so, can the Commission inform me of the current state of affairs? If not, does the Commission not
consider it desirable to set up a monitoring system of some kind?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(12 August 2003)

The functioning of national competition authorities is first of all determined by the legal framework within
which these authorities are operating. At this moment, most of the national legislations are being adapted
to the new enforcement system of Community competition law, as it has been established by Council
Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the implementation of the rules on competition laid
down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty (1). The Commission closely follows those adaptations of national
law(s) in order to ensure consistency with the said Regulation.

Turning to the more general functioning of national competition authorities within that legal framework,
the Commission would like to refer the Honourable Member to the yearly Council Recommendation on
the broad guidelines of the economic policies of the Member States and the Community, which amongst
others gives an updated oversight of the functioning of national competition authorities (2). In that same
context, the Commission would like to point the Honourable Member at the regular peer review amongst
competition authorities, which takes place within the context of
the Organisation for Economic
Cooperation and Development (OECD) and which contains valuable information on the performance of
the national competition authorities (3). Both the Council Recommendation on the broad guidelines of the
review also contain concrete recommendations as to the
economic policies and the OECD peer
improvement of the functioning of national competition authorities.

Finally, as to the application of Community competition law by national competition authorities in specific
cases, the Commission would like to refer the Honourable Member to its Annual Report on Competition
Policy, in which the Commission gives an overview of that application (4). Furthermore, from 1 May 2004
onwards, national competition authorities will inform the Commission on their intended course of action
before they apply Community competition law. This ex ante information will undoubtedly contribute to
the coherent application of Community competition law by national competition authorities.

(1) OJ L 1, 4.1.2003.
(2) http://ue.eu.int/emu/en/index.htm.
(3) http://www.oecd.org/home/.
(4) http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/annual_reports/.

(2004/C 51 E/271)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2451/03

by Margrietus van den Berg (PSE) to the Commission

(23 July 2003)

Subject: Habitats Directive areas and Natura 2000

The Commission has accepted the list of designated areas for the Netherlands, according to a report in the
Nederlands Dagblad of 9 July 2003. However,
the two problems which the
Netherlands has with the implementation of the Habitats Directive.

this was only one of

C 51 E/250

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

26.2.2004

In the case of the Waddenzee it is primarily another problem which is at stake, namely the apparently
incorrect implementation of Article 6 of the Habitats Directive in the Netherlands’ Nature Conservancy
Act, the Key Planning Decision on the Waddenzee and hence the procedure for obtaining authorisation of
activities in designated areas, including the Waddenzee.

What is the status of this problem between the Netherlands and the Commission? This is very important,
as the Netherlands Government policy accord between the coalition parties states that consideration is
being given to drilling for gas in the Waddenzee.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(12 September 2003)

The issue of the implementation of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of
natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (1) (the ‘Habitats Directive’) in the Netherlands is the subject of
an ongoing infringement procedure. The procedure regards, inter alia, the failure of the Netherlands to
provide for an adequate protection of Natura 2000 sites.

The Commission decided on 17 December 2002 to take the case to the Court of Justice (2).

For the case relating to the Key Planning Decision on the Wadden Sea, the Commission kindly invites the
Honourable Member to refer to the answer given by the Commission to the Written Question No P-2375/
03 by Mr Alexander de Roo (3), concerning Eider Ducks threatened by the cockle-fishing industry in the
Wadden Sea.

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.
(2)
see press release IP/02/1923.
(3) OJ C 33 E, 6.2.2004, p. 256.

(2004/C 51 E/272)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2461/03

by Antonios Trakatellis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(16 July 2003)

Subject: Approval of funding and construction of the Thessaloniki underground project

According to the Commission’s answer to my previous question on the Thessaloniki underground
(H-0824/02 (1)), the Greek authorities have notified it that their negotiations with the contractor and the
banks to finalise the project have been concluded, that the parties concerned have agreed on an amended
text of the concession contract as regards the construction of the Thessaloniki underground and that they
have submitted the agreed text to the Commission. On 30 April 2003 the Commission came to a decision
on the basis of the information which it had at its disposal and after a thorough investigation that there
was no indication that the contract violated Community legislation.

Why is approval of the funding of the project by the Commission being delayed? What are the reasons for
the delay in the approval and commencement of the project, given that negotiations on funding through a
loan from the contractor, the European Investment Bank (EIB), and the commercial banks have been
completed and that 11 years have now elapsed since an invitation to tender was issued for the
construction of the project with co-funding from Community funds?

(1) Written answer of 17.12.2002.