WRITTEN QUESTION E-3224/03 by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission. EC Commission proposal to replace Council Regulation (EEC) No 3820/85 on Drivers' Hours.
Date: 2003-10-31
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: derogation from EU law, drafting of EU law, driving period, road transport, transport regulations, voluntary organisation

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/793

In its judgment of 7 March 2002, the Court of Justice stated that by failing to take the legislative,
4.
regulatory and administrative measures
required to comply with Council Directive 96/61/EC of
24 September 1996 concerning integrated pollution prevention and control, Greece had failed to fulfil its
obligations under that Directive. Following the judgment, the Greek authorities successively adopted and
notified to the Commission Law 3010/2002,
joint ministerial decision 15393/2332/2002 and joint
ministerial decision 11014/703/9104/2003. Considering that Greece had complied with the obligation to
transpose Directive 96/61/EC and with the requirements of the Court’s judgment, the Commission closed
the file on the matter.

Directive 2000/69/EC has not been transposed into Greek law. The Commission has initiated
5.
infringement proceedings under Article 226 of the EC Treaty and a reasoned opinion has been addressed
to Greece.

Directive 1999/30/EC was transposed into Greek law by Council Act 34/2002. This Act was notified

6.
to the Commission.

7.
Directive 2001/81/EC has not been transposed into Greek law. The Commission has initiated
infringement proceedings under Article 226 of the EC Treaty and a reasoned opinion has been addressed
to Greece.

(1) OJ L 67, 9.3.2002.
(2) OJ L 35, 5.2.1997.
(3) Council Directive 96/62/EC of 27 September 1996 on ambient air quality assessment and management, OJ L 296,

21.11.1996.

(4) Council Directive 1999/30/EC of 22 April 1999 relating to limit values for sulphur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and

oxides of nitrogen, particulate matter and lead in ambient air, OJ L 163, 29.6.1999.

(5) Directive 2000/69/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2000 relating to limit values for

benzene and carbon monoxide in ambient air, OJ L 313, 13.12.2000.

(2004/C 78 E/0843)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3224/03

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(31 October 2003)

Subject: EC Commission proposal to replace Council Regulation (EEC) No 3820/85 on Drivers’ Hours

I have received several letters from charities and voluntary organisations concerned that the above new
replacement regulation will not include the current exemption for ‘vehicles used as shops at local markets
or for door-to-door selling or used for mobile banking, exchange or saving transactions, for worship, for
the lending of books, records or cassettes, for cultural events or exhibitions and specially fitted for such
uses’. They are concerned that
their vehicles will not be able to comply with the financial and
administrative implications of the new regulation, and will have to be withdrawn from service.

While I appreciate the importance of the new regulation, would the Commission consider reinstating the
current exemption in order that voluntary organisations could continue to provide a service to the
community?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(8 December 2003)

The Commission’s proposal (1) seeks, amongst other things,
the considerable number of
exemptions, derogations, and special arrangements in the current Regulation (2) to those which are strictly
necessary, thereby limiting any possible abuse. In drawing up its original proposal, the Commission was
advised that this particular derogation was outdated and could be removed.

to restrict

C 78 E/794

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

The Commission has received many similar letters from the United Kingdom concerning the need to retain
this derogation for specialised Play-bus vehicles. Consultations with the United Kingdom Department of
Transport have confirmed that this derogation, which the Commission proposal currently wishes to delete,
is used by the United Kingdom authorities to exempt this particular charitable activity. It is noted that
there are no other derogations which could cover this particular activity and so the Commission is open to
taking a more flexible approach on this specific derogation in any future discussions on the proposal.

(1) OJ C 51 E, 26.2.2002.
(2) Council Regulation (EEC) No 3820/85 of 20 December 1985 on the harmonisation of certain social legislation

relating to road transport, OJ L 370, 31.12.1985.

(2004/C 78 E/0844)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3229/03

by Raffaele Costa (PPE-DE)
and Jas Gawronski (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(31 October 2003)

Subject: Funding for the Turin-Lyon rail link

It would appear that the EU intends not to include the rail link between Turin and Lyon in the 15 projects
awarded priority funding, selected from the list of 29 projects previously identified by the European Plan
for Growth, which included this railway link.

How can this be possible, given that this action is a strategic project for European integration, and that it
has already reached a more advanced stage of planning than a number of the projects that have been
selected? It should also to be taken into account that the project meets the five criteria laid down by
President Prodi on 17 October 2003 (concerning projects that, Prodi requested, could produce results in
the short term, that is, within three years).

These criteria are:

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

readiness,

cross-border status serving the single market,

ability to produce impact in the context of enlargement,

ecological sustainability,

technological innovation potential.

The Turin-Lyon project fulfils all five of these criteria.

The President of the EIB recently indicated that the bank would fund projects that were ready to start, that
would have a positive economic impact, be profitable (so as to attract private capital) and be capable of
satisfying the demands of the countries affected by them, and it would seem that this project fulfils all
these criteria. Given that, above all, studies by leading financial institutions (Crédit Agricole, San Paolo,
Caisse des Dépôts and Dexia) have indicated that the project can be financed, with 30-35 % private capital,
that is, the maximum level allowed for infrastructure projects of this kind, and that postponing funding by
a further three years would be a waste of precious time, can the Commission provide information on the
matter?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(3 December 2003)

Project number 6 ‘Lyon-Milan-Venice-Trieste’ has been one of the priorities of the trans-European transport
network since the Essen European Council in 1994. The project’s added value and its importance for the
development of the trans-European transport network were clearly expressed in the Van Miert report