WRITTEN QUESTION E-0203/04 by Alexander de Roo (Verts/ALE) and Bernd Lange (PSE) to the Commission. Spanish Fuel Quality Law — Royal Decree 1700/2003.
Date: 2004-01-29
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Spain, application of EU law, environmental law, motor fuel, motor vehicle pollution, quality standard, restriction on competition, stratospheric pollutant, substitute fuel, technical specification

C 84 E/334

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

The Commission has written to the companies Intrasoft and Ogilvy in order to draw their attention to this
problem and to inform them that they should take this into account when recruiting personnel.

With regard to Intrasoft, which had been contacted by the Commission following previous parliamentary
questions on this matter, the Commission notes that this company no longer uses discriminatory wording
in job advertisements on its website; the Commission has, nevertheless, written to this company to remind
it of the rules concerning this matter.

(1) See page 302.

(2004/C 84 E/0393)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0203/04

by Alexander de Roo (Verts/ALE) and Bernd Lange (PSE) to the Commission

Subject: Spanish Fuel Quality Law (cid:1) Royal Decree 1700/2003

(29 January 2004)

In a recent Royal Decree (Real Decreto 1700/2003) implementing Directive 2003/17 (1) on fuel quality, the
Spanish government has intentionally deviated from requirements under European fuel quality legislation
for gasoline by changing the volatility (RVP) specifications in the national law.

The Spanish Decree also deviates from the European biodiesel FAME standard, agreed under the auspices
of the European standards organisation, as regards iodine specifications.

How will the Commission react to the Spanish law in order to ensure that EU environmental legislation is
uniformly applied in all Member States?

How would these changes to fuel quality specifications affect vehicle emissions and the attainment of
objectives agreed under the Auto-Oil Programmes as regards different air pollutants, and could these
deviations have a distorting effect in the internal market?

(1) OJ L 76, 22.3.2003, p. 10.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(8 March 2004)

The attention of the Commission has already been drawn to the recently adopted Spanish Royal Decree
(1700/2003) with regard to the apparent deviations from the requirements of Directive 2003/17/EC of the
Parliament and of the Council of 3 March 2003 on the quality of petrol and diesel fuels. In the short term,
the Commission is investigating this case with regard to deviations from the legal requirements laid down
in Directive 98/70/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 1998 (1) and the European bio
diesel FAME standard, as raised by the Honourable Member.

In the longer term, as part of its review of Directive 2003/17/EC, the Commission will examine the
compatibility of the specifications for petrol and diesel with increased use of bio fuels in the transport
sector. Amongst other issues, the review will examine the question of the volatility specifications for petrol
in the light of an increased use of ethanol, any potential effect on air quality objectives and any problems
that may affect the driveability of motor vehicles. In so doing the Commission will take into account the
costs and benefits of any change to the specifications and ensure there is no distortion of the functioning
of the internal market. It will take into account the recently-adopted bio fuels directive (Directive 2003/30/
EC (2)), which requires Member States to set targets on the use of bio fuels and which highlights the need
to adapt standards in order to permit this. As specified in Article 9 of Directive 2003/17/EC, this review is
due to be completed before the end of 2005.

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/335

Until any proposal to amend the legislation resulting from the review is agreed by the Council and the
Parliament, the requirements of Directive 2003/17/EC must continue to be respected and applied by the
Member States. Therefore, the Commission has opened a case against Spain concerning the problem raised
by the Honourable Member.

(1) OJ L 350, 28.12.1998, as amended by Directive 2003/17/EC, OJ L 76, 22.3.2003.
(2) OJ L 123, 17.5.2003.

(2004/C 84 E/0394)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0211/04

by Stavros Xarchakos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(30 January 2004)

Subject: Allegations of manoeuvring to seize property owned by building cooperatives in Greece

There has been a stream of allegations from numerous building cooperatives in Greece (such as ‘I YGIA’,
which owns land at Saronida, Attica, and whose members have already appealed to Parliament’s
Committee on Petitions, the cooperative of employees of the Bank of Greece, which owns land at
Anavissos, Attica, etc.), that the Greek authorities are continually obstructing the development of the
property of which the cooperatives are the legal owners. They allege that the ultimate objective is the
seizure of their property by the Greek State. The executive committees of numerous building cooperatives
(which represent 500 000 Greek citizens according to the Greek press) point out that, although they hold
the legal deeds to the property and have been recognised officially by the Greek State for almost 40 years,
the Greek authorities constantly create obstacles through their administrative departments, compelling the
cooperatives continuously to bring actions before the Greek courts, which duly rule in their favour.
Despite that, the Greek authorities (in particular the Ministry for the Environment, Planning and Public
Works) continue to concoct further obstacles with the aim (cid:1) allegedly (cid:1) of confiscating the cooperatives’
property in violation of court rulings.

Is such alleged manoeuvring in order to seize property belonging to building cooperatives consistent with
Community law? What action can the Commission take to put an end to the tactics adopted by the Greek
authorities and to ensure that the members of the above cooperatives obtain the land to which they are
entitled?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(1 March 2004)

Since this matter is not covered by Community law, the Commission does not consider itself competent to
reply to the questions put by the Honourable Member.

The Commission would also point out that any person who considers their fundamental rights to have
been violated may appeal to the European Court of Human Rights once they have exhausted all the legal
remedies available in their own country.

(2004/C 84 E/0395)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0227/04

by Ewa Hedkvist Petersen (PSE) to the Commission

Subject: Alcohol ignition interlock devices (‘alcolocks’)

(2 February 2004)

Trials are now being conducted in some parts of Sweden with ‘alcolocks’ on buses. Does the Commission
consider that a Member State can require all vehicles in the country to be fitted with ‘alcolocks’ in order to
improve road safety?