WRITTEN QUESTION P-3090/03 by Antonios Trakatellis (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Declassification of forest land and forests and redefinition of the term forest under new legislation proposed by the Greek Government..
Date: 2003-10-14
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European forestry policy, Greece, forest, forest conservation, government bill, land use, wooded area

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/777

(2004/C 78 E/0826)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3089/03

by Bruno Gollnisch (NI) to the Council

(20 October 2003)

Subject: Alstom

Article 87 of the Treaty lays down the rules governing State aids and specifies which types may be
considered as compatible with the common market, e.g. aid to promote the economic development of
certain areas or activities, or to remedy a serious disturbance in the economy of a Member State, etc.

If Alstom, which employs tens of thousands of workers in Europe, were to go bakrupt, this would have a
devastating effect on employment and the economy of entire regions and would undoubtedly cause a
‘disturbance’. And yet the Commission has decided to be particularly strict on this issue.

It is not uncommon for states to support companies experiencing difficulties. In such cases, consideration
of the strategic nature of the industrial activity or the jobs situation should take precedence over a purely
financial or economic analysis of the measures since the aid is clearly of a temporary and non-structural
nature.

Does the Council consider that
the EU texts, which have remained virtually unchanged since the
beginning, are still appropriate for responding to the challenges of competition, which is now worldwide
and, in may cases, unfair?

Is it prepared, in particular, to remove references in the relevant articles of the Treaty to competition and
the operation of the common market and replace them with references to the need to preserve jobs and
fight for the survival of strategic sectors?

Reply

(4 March 2004)

The attention of the Honourable Member is drawn to the fact that it is not within the Council’s
competencies to revise the text of the Treaty establishing the European Community. Such a revision can
only take place within the framework of an intergovernmental conference and by subsequent ratification
by the Member States.

Furthermore, it is recalled that the European Parliament has taken an active part in the work carried out by
the European Convention, and has presumably been in a position to present views on the issue raised by
the Honourable Member in that framework.

(2004/C 78 E/0827)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3090/03

by Antonios Trakatellis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(14 October 2003)

Subject: Declassification of forest land and forests and redefinition of the term ‘forest’ under new legislation

proposed by the Greek Government.

Under the new forestry bill tabled by the Greek Government, around 3 million hectares of forest and forest
land will be declassified. The proposed legislation will also redefine the term ‘forests’ and reset the legal
limits for authorisation of land and clearance operations.

In view of this and the numerous grey areas existing under the proposed legislation:

1. To what extent does this proposed legislation comply with the directives on the preservation of

natural habitats (92/43/EEC (1)) and environmental impact assessment (85/337/EEC (2)).

2. How great

is the danger which could arise from declassifying forest areas for construction or
infrastructural development purposes, given that it could result in soil erosion and increase flood risks?

C 78 E/778

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

3. Has a general Community strategy and a programme of action been formulated for nature
conservation and protection regarding forests and if so, are the new measures being proposed by the
Greek Government in line with this?

4. To what extent is the new bill in line with Common Position (EC) No 46/2003 (3) of 13 June 2003
adopted by the Council with a view to adopting a regulation of the European Parliament and of the
Council concerning the monitoring of forests and environmental
interactions in the Community
(Forest Focus) and to what extent does the definition of the term ‘forest’ contained in this regulation
coincide with that contained in the new Greek Government bill?

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.
(2) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40.
(3) OJ C 233 E, 30.9.2003, p. 1.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(12 November 2003)

The Commission has not yet been officially informed about the prepared Greek forestry Law in question.
Besides, the Law is currently a proposal and has not yet been adopted by the Greek Parliament. Given that
the legislative procedure of adoption is ongoing, the Commission is not in a position to evaluate the
possible effects of the future Law.

However, the Commission would like to draw the attention of the Honourable Member to the following:

legislation, since the objectives of

1. The Commission would like to underline that according to Article 1(5) 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, the Directive shall not apply to projects the details of which are adopted by a specific
act of national
including that of supplying
information, are achieved through the legislative process. As regards Council Directive 92/43/EEC of
21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, the Commission
would like to mention that the Directive does not explicitly refers to land use, but to habitat types.
The designation of Sites of Community Interest under the Directive is based on the ecological quality
of the habitats existing in a site and not on its classification as forest, agricultural area, wetland or
other possible land uses. The proposal of Sites of Community Interest has not been based on land use
criteria and the sites already proposed are not expected to change. The Commission, however, will
introduce after its adoption and
evaluate the possible changes in classification that the law will
implementation, in order to assess if the proposed Sites of Community Interest could be affected.

this Directive,

2. Regarding the assessment on potential risks of

increased soil erosion and flooding from the
declassification of the Greek forests and their use for infrastructural development and construction
purposes, this falls within the competence of the Greek authorities,
in the framework of legal
procedures granting permissions for such type of development and construction.

3. The EC Treaty makes no explicit provision for a comprehensive common forestry policy. However,
in 1998 the Union has established a Union Forestry Strategy. The Strategy underlines that the
management, conservation, protection and sustainable development of forests are vital concerns of
existing Union policies. The Community is supporting Member States in the management and
protection of forests: Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 of 17 May 1999, on support for rural
development from the European Agri-cultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) (1) for the
management and protection of forests, the European Biodiversity Strategy and specifically the Action
the conservation, protection and sustainable
for
Plan for Natural
management of the forests. Neither of the previous Community legislation nor the Union Forest
Strategy request compliance with a specific ‘forest’ definition. Greece has to comply with the
requirements of the existing Community legislation.

set guidelines

resources (2)

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/779

4. The Commission’s proposal for a Regulation concerning monitoring of forests and environmental
interactions in the Community (3), on which the Council has adopted the Common Position (EC)
No 46/2003 of 13 June 2003, is currently under its second reading. The Commission cannot make an
assessment about the ‘forest’ definition in the Forest Focus and the definitions of forest under the
proposed Greek Forestry Law.

(1) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999.
(2) COM(2001) 162 final.
(3) OJ C 20 E, 28.1.2003.

(2004/C 78 E/0828)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3098/03

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(20 October 2003)

Subject: Margot Wallström and the EMU campaign

Margot Wallström was heavily involved during the last weeks of the recently concluded EMU campaign in
Sweden.

Was the Commissioner on leave of absence from her normal duties at the Commission during this period?

(2004/C 78 E/0829)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3100/03

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

Subject: Commission’s involvement in national campaigns

(20 October 2003)

The Commission’s administrative guide states that the Commission and its staff must be ‘courteous,
objective and impartial’ in their dealings with the general public.

With particular reference to the requirement of impartiality, what is the Commission’s practice with regard
to the involvement of Commissioners and/or its staff in national campaigns in the run-up to referendums
on EU- and EMU-related matters?

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-3098/03 and E-3100/03
given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(19 November 2003)

As the Commission has repeatedly pointed out in answers to written or oral questions from Members of
the European Parliament (1),
its members are political figures who exercise a political role within the
parameters of which they retain the right
to express their personal opinions freely on their own
responsibility.

The Code of Conduct for Commissioners states that ‘Commissioners may be active members of political
parties or trade unions provided this not compromise their availability for the service of the Commission.’

(1) See for example, the answers by President Prodi to Questions 2459/99, 2600/99 and 2628/99, OJ C 225 E,

8.8.2000, and answer by President Prodi to Question 2629/99, OJ C 46 E, 13.2.2001.