WRITTEN QUESTION P-2799/03 by Domenico Mennitti (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Development of Pan-European corridors.
Date: 2003-09-17
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European integration, common transport policy, economic and social cohesion, trans-European network, transport infrastructure, transport network

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/433

E-2795/03

The emissions trading Directive has not laid down any specific allocation rule, including the one outlined
in the written question.

A Member State has to develop periodically a national allocation plan adhering to the criteria laid down in
Annex III of the emission trading Directive.

In the review in mid-2006 the Commission will, on the basis of the experience gathered by then, consider
the further harmonisation of the allocation method and the criteria in Annex III.

The Commission disagrees with an allocation rule which would result in the reduction of an operator’s
allocation within an ongoing trading period after the operator has sold some allowances. Such a rule is not
in line with the provisions of the Directive and would not be desirable from an economic point of view
either.

(1) Directive 2003/87/EC of 13 October 2003, OJ L 275, 25.10.2003.
(2) COM(2003) 51 final.

(2004/C 78 E/0454)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2799/03

by Domenico Mennitti (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(17 September 2003)

Subject: Development of Pan-European corridors

The process of European integration is now reaching its final stage with the accession of ten new countries
to the European Union.

There is therefore an urgent need to develop identified infrastructure to foster economic relations within
an area that has expanded enormously in size.

Of particular importance among the types of infrastructure envisaged are ‘Pan-European corridors’, which
are considered ideal tools for promoting economic exchange and especially trade.

In the light of the above, does the Commission not feel that the priority criteria should be broadened and
special attention awarded to Pan-European corridor No 8 as part of the plans to boost the countries
bordering the Mediterranean, which should be flanked with the development of adequate infrastructure?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(15 October 2003)

The enlargement of the Union will bring a major change into the corridor concept; two-thirds of the
existing Corridors will be within the territory of the Union and only one-third of the corridors will be
outside the Union territory. Corridors or axes could be seen both inside and outside of the enlarged Union
(cid:1) inside as a framework to channel the new priority transport routes which are emerging as a result of
accelerated economic integration and which are one of the subjects of the ongoing revision of the trans-
European transport network (TEN-T) guidelines, and (cid:1) outside to reflect international trade developments.

is needed.
However, a fundamental re-assessment of
The number of corridors should probably remain at a level which is manageable and affordable in terms of
financing. These redefined corridors or axes would need close and systematic supervision in order to be
realised in a reasonable amount of time. A number of useful management techniques have been developed
for the corridors. These structures (Memo of Understandings, Steering committees, etc.) are expected to
make progress with the identification of inventories, bottlenecks and priority projects.

future corridor development and management

C 78 E/434

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

In the end, the implementation of the Corridor VIII, which has been signed only recently, depends on the
countries concerned in the first place. As the Honourable Member may know, the whole alignment of the
Corridor VIII on rail is also mentioned in the Report of the TEN-T High Level Group as an important
project for territorial cohesion.

(2004/C 78 E/0455)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2819/03

by Proinsias De Rossa (PSE) to the Commission

(19 September 2003)

Subject: Environmental impact assessments in Ireland

On 22 July, the Commission announced (IP/03/1070) that it was referring Ireland to the European Court
of Justice concerning the possibility, inter alia, that Irish authorities allow a decision to be made before
impact assessment has been fully assessed in line with the EIA
rather than after an environmental
Directive.

What specific cases in Ireland is the Commission concerned about in this regard?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(28 October 2003)

The Commission’s concerns derived from its examination of the way in which the impact of the Kildare
Bypass motorway project on an internationally important wetland, Pollardstown Fen, and an associated
aquifer were assessed.

More specifically, despite advice from the statutory nature conservation authority that the information
provided by the developer was seriously deficient, certain important studies on the likely impacts were
only undertaken after the decision approving the project was already taken.

Whilst the Commission did not challenge the specific project,
it decided to challenge the underlying
approach taken on the basis that it was not compliant with the requirements of Council Directive 85/337/
EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the
environment (1).

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40.

(2004/C 78 E/0456)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2826/03

by Kathleen Van Brempt (PSE) to the Commission

(23 September 2003)

Subject: Eco-driving

Introducing a new, more environmentally friendly driving style using electronic equipment in cars, known
as ‘eco-driving’, has been a topic of discussion in Europe for some time now. I would like further
information from the Commission regarding the practicalities of eco-driving.

Can the Commission state what measures it intends to take to introduce a more environmentally friendly
driving style?

What is the Commission’s opinion of the proposal by the Netherlands Government that all new cars in
Europe be equipped with cruise control and an on-board computer? According to the Netherlands, this
could reduce fuel consumption and CO2 emissions by around 10 %. Is this proposal feasible?