WRITTEN QUESTION P-3563/03 by Monica Frassoni (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Transport Protocol of the Alpine Convention.
Date: 2003-11-25
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Alpine Region, European convention, Italy, financing method, profitability, rail network, trans-European network, transport policy, tunnel

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/67

only authorise developments in cases where no viable alternatives are available and where an overriding
public interest in the development is demonstrated. In these cases they are, however, obliged to implement
compensation measures by creation or improvement of habitat elsewhere to maintain the integrity of the
Natura 2000 network.

The Commission has not produced sector specific guidelines on applying the provisions of Article 6.
Instead, it has produced both a legal and technical guidance document as well as a separate methodological
guide on the application of provisions of this Article. These documents are available on the web site of the
Commission (2). The contents of the documents are valid for wind energy plans and projects.

While a list of sites of Community importance has yet to be fully adopted for all parts of the Union,
Member States appear generally willing to apply the safeguards of Article 6 of the Directive to sites they
nominate for proposed Special Areas of Conservation status. Where the Commission has evidence that
these safeguards are not being applied, it has been and is prepared to make use of its powers under the
EC Treaty to raise the matter, with a view to ensuring that the nature conservation objectives of the
Directive are not put in jeopardy.

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.
(2) http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/nature/natura_articles.htm

(2004/C 84 E/0073)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3563/03

by Monica Frassoni (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(25 November 2003)

Subject: Transport Protocol of the Alpine Convention

On Friday, 14 November 2003, the Italian Senate approved the Alpine Convention and, following a
proposal by the Italian Government, removed the Convention’s Transport Protocol from the list of
protocols approved.

The report by the High Level Group on Trans-European Transport Networks on the Brenner base tunnel
and the Turin-Lyon base tunnel states that ‘the economics of the tunnel and its access lines depend on an
integrated transport policy favourable to intermodality in the spirit of the Transport Protocol of the Alpine
Convention. It will be necessary to limit the development of new road capacities on the competing routes,
and to adapt the infrastructure charging policy, so that road tolls from the competing routes can
contribute to the financing of the tunnel in the framework of public-private partnership’.

The Senate’s decision, which allows the building of large trans-Alpine motorways, means in practice that
investments and railway tunnel links will be underused and, therefore, uneconomical.

Can the Commission answer the following:

1. Does the Italian Senate’s decision (and, therefore, the Italian Government’s desire) to commit itself to
long-distance trans-Alpine motorways, in stark contrast to the findings of the Van Miert Report, not
put at risk investment in rail links made by the Italian Government?

2. Does the Commission, on the basis of the decision of the Italian Senate, intend to review its own

decisions regarding European funding for Italian rail links?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(7 January 2004)

The Commission’s proposal on Trans-European network guidelines, which follows broadly the recom-
mendations of a High Level Group on the trans-European transport network, aims at ensuring the
completion of the Single market, the success of enlargement and modal transfer towards modes with less

C 84 E/68

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

congestion and environmental problems. Cross-border sections and crossing of natural barriers were
identified as two key areas. Therefore, the proposal puts an important focus on railway investments
crossing the Alps.

A new proposal to amend the so-called Eurovignette directive proposes a harmonised method for charging
full infrastructure costs to heavy goods vehicles. According to this proposal, a mark-up can be levied in
environmentally sensitive zones such as the Alps to cross-finance investments in alternative modes.

In the case of the Alps, where transport capacity is scarce,
improved railway services, based on the
respective infrastructure improvements, will reduce demand on road according to recent studies. On the
other hand, charging for road use will also induce higher demand for railways.

The Commission proposal of 1 October 2003 identifies the European priority projects,
including the
Brenner base tunnel and the Turin-Lyon base tunnel. This Commission proposal is currently discussed in
the Council and the Parliament.

The Commission cannot intervene in a decision taken at a national level like the decision to ratify the
Transport Protocol of the Alpine Convention. However, when assessing Member States’ proposals for
project funding, an assessment will be made as to the financial feasibility as well as to the strategic
environmental impacts. Consideration will therefore be given to parallel projects developed on a national
basis and influencing the profitability of the rail tunnels.

(2004/C 84 E/0074)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3594/03

by Wolfgang Kreissl-Dörfler (PSE) to the Commission

(1 December 2003)

Subject: Novel Foods Regulation EC No 258/97, marketing of noni products in the EU

Pursuant to Article 1(2)(e) of Regulation EC No 258/97 (1), foods and food ingredients consisting of or
isolated from plants and obtained by traditional propagating or breeding practices and having a history of
safe food use do not fall within the scope of that Regulation. Pursuant to Article 3(4) of the Regulation,
a simplified notification procedure as set out in Article 5 of the Regulation applies to foods or food
ingredients that are judged to be substantially equivalent to foods or food ingredients already authorised.
The EU has authorised the placing on the market by the company Morinda of noni juice as a novel food.
For other products produced from noni fruit, however, the basic possibility of their being regarded as
substantially equivalent to the authorised juice has to date always been refused.

The costly authorisation procedure under the Regulation prevents small and medium-sized companies
from introducing new natural products into the EU. In effect, this creates a monopoly for large groups, as
only big companies have sufficient resources to carry out such procedures.

According to what criteria is ‘having a history of safe food use’ defined in this connection, and which

1.
institution decides whether a food or food ingredient has a history of safe food use?