WRITTEN QUESTION E-4068/03 by Mario Borghezio (NI) to the Commission. Unlawful toll demanded for the Turin-Milan motorway.
Date: 2004-01-14
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Italy, consumer protection, reduced price, toll, transport user

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/749

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(18 February 2004)

At European level, in order to enhance the level of security in the area of freedom, security and justice, the
Thessaloniki European Council (19/20 June 2003) called for ‘a coherent approach in the EU on biometric
identifiers or biometric data which would result in harmonised solutions for documents for third country
nationals, EU citizens’ passports and information systems (VIS and SIS II)’, and invited the Commission ‘to
prepare the appropriate proposals, starting with the visa’.

As a first step, the Commission presented in September 2003 two proposals (1) on the integration of two
biometric identifiers, the facial
into the uniform format for visa and the
residence permit for third country nationals.

image and two fingerprints,

In a second step, the Commission will soon present a proposal on the harmonisation of the security
features of the European Passport including biometrics. This proposal will only relate to provisions which
improve the security of the passport by harmonising, and rendering legally binding, common security
features, which are currently set out in a non-binding Resolution of the Representatives of Member States
meeting within the Council. Furthermore, biometrics shall be integrated. The exercise to be undertaken
should not go beyond what is required for security reasons and the control of citizens crossing the external
borders.

the integration of biometric identifiers

The proposals on visa and residence permits for third country nationals (1) set out the legislative framework
in such documents. The development of practical
for
implementation measures as regards the technical specifications for the chosen biometric identifiers and
their rendering secure is the task of the Committee created by Article 6 of Council Regulation (EC)
No 1683/95 of 29 May 1995 on a uniform format for visas (2). The implementation delay, which will be
two years for the facial image and three years for the fingerprints, can only start when those technical
specifications have been adopted by the Commission.

In relation to the passport, a similar system will be proposed in the above-mentioned proposal for a
Regulation.

(1) COM(2003) 558 final.
(2) OJ L 164, 14.7.1995.

(2004/C 84 E/0844)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4068/03

by Mario Borghezio (NI) to the Commission

(14 January 2004)

Subject: Unlawful toll demanded for the Turin-Milan motorway

As a result of the work being carried out on a new high-speed rail link, around 100 kilometres of the
123-kilometre-long Turin to Milan motorway are subject to restrictions and diversions, squeezed between
dangerous concrete lane separators and completely devoid of any emergency lanes. This clearly entails
serious risks for the safety of its users.

In these circumstances, since it is evident that, in many respects, the Turin-Milan section no longer exhibits
the characteristics of a motorway, does the Commission not view as unlawful the concessionary company’s
demand for payment of a toll and its refusal to at least make a reduction in that toll for Italian and
European drivers?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(17 February 2004)

It is a matter of fact that motorways are sometimes temporarily affected by construction works restricting
their use. However, in these cases, as well as in the one the Honourable Member mentions, the motorway

C 84 E/750

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

does not cease to be a motorway in accordance with the provisions of the Directive 1999/62/EC of the
Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 1999 on the charging of heavy goods vehicles for the use of
certain infrastructures (1). The Directive does not cover private cars. The decision to reduce tolls paid by
private cars as suggested in the question is, therefore, a matter for concessionary motorways according to
their own commercial policy and the national legal requirements.

(1) OJ L 187, 20.7.1999.

(2004/C 84 E/0845)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0003/04

by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(16 January 2004)

Subject: Trade in wild birds

Is the Commission aware of the legal trade in wild-caught birds in Europe? Between 1997 and 2000 nearly
half a million birds, mainly parrots, were imported into Europe.

Would the Commission consider protecting these birds by introducing legislation to ban this, similar to
that now valid in the USA? Since the introduction in the USA of the ‘Wild Bird Conservation Act’,
poaching has fallen. It is anticipated that European legislation would have the same effect.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(23 February 2004)

The Commission is fully aware of legal trade in wild birds and there is already specific Community
legislation in place to protect wild birds.

Most of the wild bird species that are in demand in trade (including parrots) are listed in the appendices to
the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). CITES is
implemented in the EU through Council Regulation (EC) No 338/97 of 9 December 1996 on the
protection of species of wild fauna and flora by regulating trade therein (1). The primary purpose of CITES
and of Council Regulation (EC) No 338/97 is to protect wild species of flora and fauna from unsustainable
trade. The aims of CITES are not against all trade in wildlife, but to contribute to the conservation of these
species by regulating trade therein, whilst fighting illegal traffic.

Under the Wild Bird Conservation Act (WBCA), the United States does not allow the import of CITES-
listed birds caught from the wild, except as allowed by certain exemptions under the WBCA. One of the
exemptions is for birds from an approved sustainable use management program, but currently there are no
approved programs. At the moment, the Commission does not see a need to introduce similar legislation
for the reasons mentioned below.

Council Regulation (EC) No 338/97 lists the endangered species according to their threat status in four
annexes (A to D). Annex A concerns the species that need the most protection because they are threatened
with extinction. Because of their critical conservation status commercial trade in wild specimens of these
species is prohibited (cid:1) such trade is only allowed for purposes of conservation benefit (cid:1) e.g. research,
education, captive breeding projects etc. However, the bulk of the annexed species are in Annex B. This
annex lists species that are not necessarily threatened with extinction but may become so. Commercial
trade in these species is strictly regulated.