WRITTEN QUESTION E-3106/03 by María Bergaz Conesa (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. The Júcar-Vinalopó water diversion project.
Date: 2003-10-22
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Investment Bank, Spain, Structural Funds, co-financing, dissemination of information, environmental impact, hydrology, impact study, project evaluation

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/465

Today mussels are already being farmed in coastal areas including Bohuslän in Sweden, but attempts to
expand such farming have entailed major problems. Mussel farming is hampered by long periods when
harvesting has to stop because of toxic algae that make mussels poisonous.

How does the Commission assess the strategic role of mussel farming as a way of reducing the incidence
of eutrophication and what measures are being taken to ensure that
this industry can survive
commercially?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(16 December 2003)

The Commission is certainly aware of the problems caused by eutrophication to the marine ecosystem.

The causes of this problem are diverse and their interrelation complex. However, a high level of nutrients
in the water appears to be a condition sine qua non for the development of eutrophication episodes.

For that reason, Community action in this field mainly aims at reducing the input of nutrients to the
marine waters, independently of their origin.

Aquaculture activities, both in freshwater and in the marine, are in some cases at the origin of effluents
rich in nutrients to the sea. For that reason, the use of farmed mussels as natural fighters against
eutrophication should be carefully assessed before its possible implementation. Moreover, as toxin-
producing algae are often carried from offshore to inshore waters by currents, they can be harmful
irrespective of the level of filter feeders near the coast.

Farming of mussels and other bivalves may enjoy, as many other forms of aquaculture, the measures
foreseen in Council Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999 laying down the detailed rules and arrangements
regarding Community structural assistance in the fisheries sector (1).

(1) OJ L 337, 30.12.1999.

(2004/C 78 E/0490)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3106/03

by María Bergaz Conesa (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

Subject: The Júcar-Vinalopó water diversion project

(22 October 2003)

The Júcar-Vinalopó water diversion project is a massive scheme (total cost over EUR 50 million) which
forms part of the Spanish National Hydrological Plan, and was submitted for Community funding in
October 2002. The technical features of the scheme mean that the diverting of water from the Júcar to the
Vinalopó is intrinsically linked up with diverting water from the Ebro, a project not yet forwarded to the
Commission. The National Hydrological Plan confirms this, by providing for the delivery of 63 hectolitres3
in the vicinity of the Tous dam so as to make the diversion from the Júcar to the Vinalopó possible
(see Analysis of the Precedents and Water Transfers Raised by the National Hydrological Plan p. 170).

The scheme is being subjected to detailed analysis by the Commission (DG Environment)
from an
environmental impact point of view, and the European Investment Bank is carrying out a feasibility study
whose results have not been made public.

Independent experts claim that the scheme is neither economically nor environmentally viable, and suffers
from major shortcomings from a technical standpoint, such as the absence of a precise, updated and
complete environmental impact assessment. The project’s shortcomings have been communicated to both
Commission and Parliament in the shape of various complaints from citizens, petitions and parliamentary
questions.

C 78 E/466

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

Despite all this, the Spanish Government is going ahead with the scheme, and intends to continue with the
work, by small units and in sections, according to statements by the Spanish Ministry of the Environment.
Such haste could conflict with a proper assessment of the Community complaints submitted.

Could the Commission make the content and conclusions of the EIB study available? Does the Commission
believe that the project depends, to a substantive degree, on the transfer of waters from the Ebro? Does the
Commission intend to ask the Spanish authorities to update the environmental impact assessment, and
provide a cost-benefit assessment, as well as compliance with the other requirements applicable to large-
scale projects according to Article 26 of the Regulation on the structural funds (Regulation EC No 1260/
1999 (1))? Can the Commission confirm whether the Commissioner has reached an undertaking with the
Minister responsible for the report to be published before the end of this year?

(1) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(19 December 2003)

The Commission wishes to inform the Honourable Member that it consulted the European Investment
Bank (EIB), within the framework of the cooperation agreement with the EIB and the regulatory provisions,
in order to have an independent opinion. The Commission asked the EIB for a technical report on the
viability of the Júcar-Vinalopó water diversion project. The EIB presented its report on 1 August 2003. The
bank concludes that, subject to specific conditions, the project is viable by itself (cid:1) independently from
implementation of the Ebro water diversion project.

It should be pointed out that the Spanish authorities confirm that the option envisaged in the preliminary
draft law on the National Hydrological Plan, namely diverting the Ebro to the Júcar and the latter to the
Vinalopó, was ultimately not chosen in the version of the document presented for public information from
20 June to 2 August 2003.

The Commission considers that the information at its disposal, re-examined and supplemented by the EIB
technical study, is sufficient at this stage for the project to be successfully evaluated in the light of the
Structural Funds’ regulatory requirements, including the aspects referred to in Article 26 of Regulation (EC)
No 1260/1999 (1).

The Commission wishes to add that, in order to supplement that information, the conditions stipulated in
the EIB report were examined and then passed on to the Spanish authorities. If other information proves
necessary in the course of examining the case, the Commission will request it from the relevant authorities.
On 20 October 2003 the Spanish authorities formally responded to the conditions drawn up. The
Commission is currently evaluating that response.

The Commission is not aware of a formal commitment to publish the report.

To conclude, this is a complex case still under examination and the Commission has not yet taken a final
decision on the application for part-financing.

The Honourable Member should also refer to the supplementary answer given by the Commission to
written question No E-0419/03 from Ms Gonzalez Alvarez (2).

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds (cid:1)

OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.

(2) OJ C 70 E, 20.3.2004, p. 28.