WRITTEN QUESTION E-2511/03 by Mario Borghezio (NI) to the Commission. Ventimiglia to Monaco railway line out of use: appeal to the Commission to approach the French authorities.
Date: 2003-07-29
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: France, Italy, free movement of goods, public works, rail network, tunnel

C 65 E/166

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

13.3.2004

(2004/C 65 E/181)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2510/03

by Roberto Bigliardo (UEN) to the Commission

(29 July 2003)

Subject: Rental of the City Center Building

The Commission’s Brussels Office for infrastructures and logistics (OIB) is about to rent the City Centre
Building near the Gare du Nord district even though the administration’s health and safety unit has advised
it not to do so.

The Brussels property lobby has been attempting for years, without success, to persuade the Commission
to establish a third centre of activity for the European institutions in the Gare du Nord district.

Is the rental of the City Center Building intended to pave the way for a large-scale transfer of staff to

1.
the Gare du Nord district?

If so, can the Commission say why it is choosing to move officials to an area with serious problems

2.
as regards quality of life and security?

Could the Commission say, at all events, what it will do to stop the rental of the City Center

3.
Building?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(3 November 2003)

Consideration of the ‘City Center’ as a possible location for Commission staff originated from a request of
the administrative services of
to occupy the ‘Montoyer 75’ building (MO75). The
Commission responded positively to this request and asked the OIB to search for a new building in
which to relocate the officials of the Directorate General for Research and Technological Development (DG
RTD) who currently occupy MO75.

the Parliament

Over an extended period the Parliament had itself commenced negotiations to lease City Center for its own
requirements if it became evident that an exchange with the Commission was not possible. In the apparent
absence of alternative options which would have allowed the Commission to vacate MO75 by the date
requested by the Parliament, OIB took over these negotiations. After due consideration it was recognised
that City Center would not be suitable, and OIB therefore continued to work to finding better alternatives,
within or close to the European quarter. Despite some complications, discussions on a more suitable
option are now progressing, and the promoters of the City Center project have been informed that
Commission services will not be taking this building.

For the record,
it should be noted that the CSHT (Comité de Sécurité et Hygiène au Travail) of the
Commission in Brussels did not reach either a negative or a positive opinion on the suitability of City
Center and the USHT (Unité de Sécurité et Hygiène au Travail) laid down a number of conditions to be
fulfilled for occupying the building. It is consequently not strictly accurate to suggest that consideration of
the possibility of renting City Center was against the advice of health and safety specialists in the
Commission.

(2004/C 65 E/182)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2511/03

by Mario Borghezio (NI) to the Commission

(29 July 2003)

Subject: Ventimiglia to Monaco railway line out of use: appeal to the Commission to approach the French

authorities

The fact that the stretch of line between Ventimiglia and Monaco is out of use owing to the work being
carried out in the Roquebrune tunnel is severely harming Ventimiglia’s economy, bearing in mind also that
the work is scheduled to continue until at least the end of 2003.

13.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65 E/167

What representations will the Commission make to the French authorities to persuade them to speed up
the work to repair the damage to the tunnel, thereby enabling the above-mentioned track section to be
brought back into service as quickly as possible?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(12 September 2003)

The Ventimiglia-Moncao line was closed to traffic following a cave-in which occurred in mid-June 2003 in
the tunnel which runs under Monaco. Even though the infrastructure manager concerned (Réseau Ferré de
France) is having to carry out considerable repair work, service is due to resume gradually by the end of
the year. Since this operation is akin to maintenance rather than construction of new infrastructure or
upgrading of existing infrastructure, it would not have been possible, even if the French authorities had so
requested, for the project to be co-financed from the trans-European transport network (TEN-T) budget.

For a Member State temporarily to obstruct an important route may constitute a restriction on the free
movement of goods. The Court has already found that measures which delay the movement of goods
between Member States have the effect of restricting the free movement of goods in a way which is
incompatible with Article 28 of the EC Treaty (1).

However, like Advocate General Jacobs in the Schmidberger case (2), the Commission believes there can be
no absolute obligation to ensure that goods can move unimpeded at all times and at any cost, failure to
observe which would always be an infringement of Community law. For instance, delays caused when
repair work has to be carried out are an inherent part of rail transport and the causes may be unavoidable,
especially where user safety is at stake.

In view of the above and of the information supplied to it, the Commission does not believe that the
interruption of the Ventimiglia-Monaco rail service by the work under way in the Roquebrune tunnel is
liable to constitute a restriction on the free movement of goods such as is incompatible with Article 28 of
the EC Treaty.

Judgment of 26 September 2000 in Case C-23/99 Commission v France, ECR I-7653, paragraph 22.

(1)
(2) C-112/00, ECR 2003.

(2004/C 65 E/183)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2520/03

by Carles-Alfred Gasòliba i Böhm (ELDR) to the Council

Subject: Linguistic plurality of Spain with regard to passports

(29 July 2003)

The Resolution of 10 July 1995 (1) requires all Member States to adjust the format of their passports by
replacing the term ‘European Communities’ with that of ‘European Union’.

In connection with this adjustment, a proposal was tabled in the Spanish Parliament that centred on
recognising the plurality of official languages in passports of citizens resident in autonomous communities
where there is more than one official language. However, the Spanish Government rejected this proposal,
citing the Resolution of 23 June 1981 (2).

Since Article I-3 of the Draft EU Constitutional Treaty states that ‘The Union shall respect its rich cultural
and linguistic diversity’ and Article II-22 thereof adds that ‘The Union shall respect cultural, religious and
linguistic diversity’, thus echoing the Charter on Fundamental Rights, and given the conclusions of the
European Year of Languages established by decision of the Parliament and the Council, does the Council
intend to amend the said Resolution to include all the official languages of EU Member States in their
passports?

(1) OJ C 200, 4.8.1995, p. 1.
(2) OJ C 241, 19.9.1981, p. 1.