WRITTEN QUESTION E-3750/03 by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission. Update on use of funding from the LIFE III programme by the municipality of Florence.
Date: 2003-12-10
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU financing, Italy, eligibility criteria, environmental protection, local government

C 78 E/854

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

In view of the increasing number of complaints received on the cost of permanent resident cards by Union
nationals, the Commission will contact the Dutch authorities in order to verify what are the current costs
of permanent residence cards and ask them whether, and in what way, Union nationals are informed about
their right to obtain only a temporary residence permit at the same price as that charged to nationals for
identity cards.

(2004/C 78 E/0906)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3749/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(10 December 2003)

Subject: Update on use of funding from the LIFE III programme by the municipality of Massa

In its answer to question E-1052/03 (1), which asked whether the municipality of Massa had submitted
projects and secured funding under the LIFE III programme, the Commission stated that a number of
proposals had been submitted but they had not been funded.

Can the Commission say why the projects submitted were not considered suitable?

(1) OJ C 280 E, 21.11.2003, p. 104.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(16 January 2004)

The Commission informs the Honourable Member that the proposal submitted by the municipality of
Massa under the LIFE III Programme for 2000 was not co-financed. The Commission informed the
applicant of the reasons in its letter of 10 September 2001. The municipality of Massa did not submit any
proposals in 2002 or 2003.

(2004/C 78 E/0907)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3750/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(10 December 2003)

Subject: Update on use of funding from the LIFE III programme by the municipality of Florence

In its answer to question E-1049/03 (1), which asked whether the municipality of Florence had submitted
projects and secured funding under the LIFE III programme, the Commission stated that a number of
proposals had been submitted but they had not been funded.

Can the Commission say why the projects submitted were not considered suitable?

(1) OJ C 280 E, 21.11.2003, p. 104.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(20 January 2004)

The Commission informs the Honourable Member that the two proposals submitted by the municipality of
Firenze under the LIFE III Programme for 2002 were not co-financed.

Proposal LIFE02 ENV/IT/000074 failed criterion 3 ‘Coherence and quality’. The beneficiary was informed
in the Commission’s letter of 2 September 2002.

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/855

Although proposal LIFE02 ENV/IT/000087 passed the selection criteria, its score was insufficiently high,
relative to other proposals to qualify for co-financing. The beneficiary was informed in our letter of
2 September 2002.

The municipality of Firenze did not submit any proposals in 2000 or 2003.

(2004/C 78 E/0908)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3762/03

by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(11 December 2003)

Subject: Commission proceedings against Greece for

infringing Community legislation in the tele-

communications sector

In response to a recent question I tabled on the provision of the ADSL service in Greece (E-3072/03 (1)),
the Commissioner responsible stated that ‘Greece has not yet transposed the new Community [regulatory]
framework [for electronic communications]’ and that ‘the Commission has been informed of the slow
progress in the provision of broadband services in Greece’. He also states that the ‘the Commission has
initiated infringement proceedings against Greece for non-communication of the transposition measures.’
As regards the limited margin between wholesale and retail prices for the provision of ADSL lines, he
states that the Commission is following the case closely and will ‘either bring infringement proceedings …
or use its powers under the EC Treaty competition rules’ should the behaviour by OTE prove to be
incompatible with its obligations under Article 82 of the EC Treaty.

Will the Commission say:

1. When did it bring infringement proceedings for non-communication of the transposition measures
into Greek domestic legislation, what deadlines has it given the Greek government and what measures
does it envisage taking should Greece fail to meet these deadlines?

2. When is a decision expected to be taken on the behaviour by OTE regarding the margin between
wholesale and retail prices, and what measures does it intend to take in the event of an infringement
of Community competition legislation?

(1) See page 218.

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(3 February 2004)

the Framework Directive (1),

the Universal Service Directive (2),

The Commission opened four infringement proceedings against Greece,

in particular for non-
1.
the Authorisation
transposition of
Directive (3) and the Access Directive (4). In this context, the Commission sent on 6 October 2003 four
Letters of Formal Notice (LFN) to Greece. A deadline of two months was given to Greece to reply to the
LFN until 6 December 2003. Greece has recently replied informing the Commission that a draft law has
already been prepared by the Ministry following a public consultation. Nevertheless, the Commission’s
concerns expressed in the Letters of Formal Notice were not satisfied by the reply of Greece and in view of
the situation the Commission has decided to proceed to the next phase of the infringement proceedings
and send Reasoned Opinions to Greece.

Relevant information on the proceedings was made public by the Commission in a press release on
8 October 2003 and 17 December 2003 (5) as well as the 9th Implementation Report (6) published
recently.

2.
The National Communications and Post Commission (EETT), the Greek Regulator, is in principle
responsible for reviewing the tariffs applied by OTE. In this context, the EETT needs to ensure that price
squeezes are not practised by any party. The Commission has already provided guidance to National
to monitor possible price squeezes
Regulatory Authorities (NRAs)

in its 1998 ‘Access Notice’ (7)