WRITTEN QUESTION E-0267/04 by Juan Ferrández Lezaun (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Projects offering alternatives to the Spanish National Hydrological Plan (SNHP).
Date: 2004-02-04
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU financing, Spain, environmental protection, hydraulic works, soft technology, water supply

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/767

It has, however, proven difficult (also in the United States) to get the commercial sector (and in particular
the financial sector) interested in and committed to uptake of ISO/IEC 15408. This was highlighted at the
International Common Criteria Conference held in Stockholm in September 2003. To remedy this, ENISA
could support the uptake of such a standard by engaging the stakeholders in network security in a
discussion of the issues, problems and opportunities associated with the use of Common Criteria.

As far as network and information security standardisation is concerned, the Commission is assessing the
implications of the recent joint CEN-ETSI report (3), which deals with network and information security
standardisation issues that are relevant to the European Standards Organizations (ESOs). On this basis,
future actions and policy initiatives will be elaborated.

At the technical level, the Commission has set the development of secure products and systems as a high
priority of the IST programme and this would certainly contribute to improving the development practices
of ICT products in Europe. ENISA could complement this activity by helping the Member States in
developing appropriate education curricula on security, sharing experiences and co-operation on awareness
campaigns targeting in particular small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).

the
As the Common Criteria standards provide a framework for product security and certification,
Commission would consider the adoption of such a standard in procurement activities, to date, as a good
practice in all cases where stringent and auditable security is needed. Hence, should ENISA have such
needs, it would be advisable to refer, as appropriate, to the Common Criteria while procuring its own
products or giving advice to the Commission and Member State Governments on the use of Common
Criteria in procurement. However, the Commission shall not forget that certified security does not come
cheaply.

Lastly, it is important to note that the technical standard ISO/IEC 15408 would not be sufficient to ensure
adequate level of security in an organisation. Indeed, any organisation or business shall also select and
adhere to a management security standard (such as ISO/IEC 17799) to build and manage the necessary
security processes and practices.

(1) OJ L 93, 26.4.1995.
(2) COM(2001) 298 final.
(3) ETSI SR 002 298.

(2004/C 84 E/0863)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0267/04

by Juan Ferrández Lezaun (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(4 February 2004)

Subject: Projects offering alternatives to the Spanish National Hydrological Plan (SNHP)

In November 2001 the Spanish ministries for science and technology, agriculture and the environment
signed a protocol for studying and financing a project for desalination in Almeria as a possible way of
remedying the water shortage in that region. In 2001 CIRCE (centre for research on energy resources and
consumption) also drew up another report for the Ministry for the Environment.

The research findings support the desalination option and conclude that desalination plants, as well as
offering optimum energy yield by using new technologies, would make it possible to supply 82 cubic
hectometres per year at a price of EUR 0,30 per cubic metre in Almeria, whereas 90 cubic hectometres
per year are supposed to be delivered under the National Hydrological Plan. The area’s water needs could
thus be covered with less impact on the environment and the water would cost less than the water
diverted under the SNHP (EUR 0,34 per cubic metre).

Does the Commission know about these reports? If not, does it not consider that the SNHP project and its
funding should be suspended until existing alternative projects have been assessed, such as those submitted
by the government of Aragón or the aforementioned desalination plants, which have a lesser social,
economic and environmental impact?

C 84 E/768

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(16 March 2004)

The Commission is not aware of the specific studies referred to by the Honourable Member. However, the
Commission has received extensive information in the context of the ongoing discussion/reflections on the
Spanish Hydrological Plan, concerning the efficacy and decreasing costs of desalination techniques. The
thrust of much of this information is that the most recent advances in desalination technology enable the
production of water with lower financial and environmental costs than other water supply alternatives.

The information on the potential of desalination will be taken into account by the Commission in the
context of future decisions relating to the requests for Community funding (structural funds and cohesion
fund) recently submitted by the Spanish authorities in relation to the proposed Ebro transfer.

(2004/C 84 E/0864)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0300/04

by Roberto Bigliardo (UEN) to the Commission

(6 February 2004)

Subject: Financing for the new Athens airport

By decision E(96) 1356 of 23 May 1996 the Commission granted the company AIA SA funding of
EUR 250 million to build the new Athens airport at Spata.

The company subsequently (on 14 June 1996) signed a contract for the airport project with Hochtief AG,
formerly called Gebr. Helfmann of Essen (Germany), for a sum of EUR 1,8 billion. In its turn this company
set up a branch in Athens which is not entered on the register of limited companies. Hochtief has
concluded a whole series of contracts with other firms in order to sub-contract the construction work.

Hochtief has a 45 % share in AIA SA, the Greek State 55 %, although Hochtief controls the board of
directors with 5 out of 9 directors. The Commission’s decision E (96) 1356 named AIA SA as the entity
responsible for carrying out the project. According to Article 12.2.6. of Greek Law No 2338/95, AIA SA
cannot be considered as a body governed by public law, and Article 10 of Regulation No 1164/94 (1) states
that funding may be granted only to bodies governed by public law.

Spat airport has also set extremely high airport taxes, because of its dominant position in air traffic to and
from Greece. This prompted a number of passengers to lodge complaints with the Commission in July
2002.

Can the Commission say how it justifies granting the funding directly to a limited company rather

1.
than to a body governed by public law?

2. Why it has not yet responded to the complaints concerning the high airport taxes charged by Spata
airport?

3. Which of the two companies (cid:1) Hochtief AG or Hellas SA (cid:1) issued the invoice for the payment of
EUR 1,8 billion to the company AIA, which was subsequently submitted to the Commission to justify the
funding of EUR 250 million?

(1) OJ L 130, 25.5.1994, p. 1.

Supplementary answer
given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(29 April 2004)

1.
The company Athens International Airport (AIA) Ltd is the airport concession-holder for a period of
30 years. Council Regulation (EC) No 1164/94 of 16 May 1994 establishing a Cohesion Fund, which was
in force at the date of the Commission decision, does not restrict the legal status of the implementing body