WRITTEN QUESTION P-0843/04 by Luigi Vinci (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Approval by the Friuli-Venezia Giulia region of the Ronchi south-Trieste high-speed rail link as part of Corridor 5.
Date: 2004-03-09
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Italy, application of EU law, environmental impact, environmental law, environmental protection, rail network, road building, water supply

C 84 E/892

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

consistent with the European General Bank’s (ECB) medium term stability target. Regarding the volume
increase, while the EU27 economy is likely to grow by 2,5 % in real terms over the period 2007-2011,
there is a sizeable growth differential between current and new Member States. From 2007 to 2011 EU15
real gross domestic product (GDP) growth is expected to be 2,2 %, AC10 (10 new Member States) real
GDP growth will be 4,1 %, with Bulgaria and Romania growing by 5,6 %.

These 2007-2011 calculations are based on actual data up until 2002 and the short term forecasts
(Autumn 2003) of Directorate-General Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN) until 2004. Thereafter,
growth rates of GDP are calculated using DG ECFIN’s production function methodology for calculating
medium term trends. This implies that for the period 2005-2011, growth is assumed to be at its trend
rate. In the framework used for these calculations, growth trends are calculated on the basis of projections
on the growth rate of technical progress or Total Factor Productivity (TFP), the investment to output ratio,
the employment rate and the growth rate of the population of working age.

2.
Of course, projections over such a long period of time are subject to both downside and upside risks.
For the current Member States there is the downside risk that TFP growth may actually not recover as
predicted in the central scenario. TFP growth is currently low as it has been on a declining trend since the
1970s. A continuing improvement in labour market conditions, as observed since the mid 1990s, could
also be questioned. For the new Member States, one can ask whether the high investment to GDP ratios
will be sustained until 2011 and whether the employment rate will recover at the speed which is assumed
in the central scenario.

Under more pessimistic assumptions the EU economy (27 Member States) would only grow by 2,2 % in
real terms (and 4,2 % in nominal terms) over 2007-2011. Growth would be 2,0 % in EU15, 3,6 % in AC10
and 5,0 % in Bulgaria and Romania.

There are also upside risks. If labour market reform efforts continue then the Lisbon employment targets
could be reached more closely in EU15. In a moderately optimistic scenario it is assumed that current
unemployment trends will continue for those countries on a declining trend and there will be a trend
reversal for countries with currently rising trends. In this case an employment rate of 68,5 % could be
reached in 2011 and growth in EU15 could be 0,1 % higher over the period 2007-2011 and reach 2,3 %
(AC10=4,1 and EU27=2,6). Since under these assumptions the Lisbon employment target would not have
been reached by individual countries a more optimistic scenario assumes that all countries currently below
70 % could reach that target, while countries currently above 70 % would remain there. In this case the
employment rate would be 71,1 % in 2011 and average growth in EU15 would rise to 2,7 % (1)
(AC10=4,1 % and EU27=2,9 %).

(1)

It must be mentioned that this scenario is very optimistic, not necessarily because of the employment rate but in
these simple calculations two partially offsetting effects are not taken into account. First, a higher percentage of the
additional employment could be part time and the skill level of the newly created employment would be lower.
Second employment would probably be created with a bias towards service sectors, thus the investment rate is
likely to drop temporarily.

(2004/C 84 E/0986)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0843/04

by Luigi Vinci (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(9 March 2004)

Subject: Approval by the Friuli-Venezia Giulia region of the Ronchi south-Trieste high-speed rail link as

part of Corridor 5

On 9 February 2004 the Commission answered the Written Question of 5 December 2003 (Written
Question E-3873/03 (1)) asking whether the preliminary projects for the construction of a third motorway
link (Quarto d’Altino-Sistiana) and the high-speed rail link between Ronchi South and Trieste complied

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/893

with Directives 85/337/EEC (2), 97/11/EC (3) and 90/313/EEC (4), and with the Habitat directive 92/43/
EEC (5) and Directive 2001/42/EC (6) on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on
the environment.

The Commission’s answer stated that, since no authorisations have been issued by the Friuli-Venezia Giulia
region concerning the abovementioned projects, no breaches of the directives had been committed.

In its Decision No 3949 of 5 December 2004, the Friuli-Venezia Giulia region approved the preliminary
project for the Ronchi-Trieste section of the new high-speed rail link between Venice and Trieste, thereby
authorising the location for the works, despite the unfavourable opinions of all local authorities consulted,
which were included in the decision (8 authorities plus 3 whose opinions were submitted after the
deadline).

Hundreds of people have expressed their opposition to the high-speed rail link, including the criticisms of
the environmental impact study and the planned new rail infrastructure contained in the studies submitted
on 16 June 2003 by the Lega Ambiente, LIPU, WWF of Monfalcone, Legal Ambiente of Trieste, and WWF
and Italian Nostra of Trieste, as well as the study by AmbienteItalia of May 2003 which was drawn up at
the behest of various local authorities, including the municipality of Ronchi dei Legionari.

On 11 June 2003, despite the patent lack of information in the preliminary project for the rail link, the
company Acegas, which is responsible for the water supply for Trieste, drew the attention of all local
authorities to the fact that the project would pose a threat to water supply sources for Trieste and
Monfalcone.

Will the Commission say whether it considers that the procedures provided for in Italy by Law 443 of
21 December 2001 and Legislative Decree 190/2002 on the selection and assessment of infrastructure
works fully comply with the directives on the environment and the provision of adequate public
information referred to above and whether it believes that the authorisation for the location of the work
on the Ronchi south-Trieste rail link contained in Decision No 3949 of 5 December 2003 is in breach of
the abovementioned Community provisions?

(1) OJ C 78 E, 27.3.2004, p. 867.
(2) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40.
(3) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997, p. 5.
(4) OJ L 158, 23.6.1990, p. 56.
(5) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.
(6) OJ L 197, 21.7.2001, p. 30.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(13 April 2004)

Directive 85/337/EEC, as amended (1), aims at ensuring that decisions to grant development consent are
issued after having assessed the likely impact of the projects on the environment and after having given
the public concerned (which is to be defined by the competent authorities of the Member States) the
possibility to present observations. The results of consultations and the information gathered pursuant to
Articles 5, 6 and 7 of the Directive must be taken into consideration in the development consent
procedure.

Moreover, the Directive does not imply that projects in relation to which negative opinions by consulted
stakeholders, including local authorities, are expressed, and even in relation to which the environmental
impact assessment has been ascertained to be significant, cannot be authorized. It only aims at making the
competent authorities aware of the environmental implications of the projects which are submitted for
consent. It is for them to decide whether or not to grant the consent, provided that the results of the
consultations and the information gathered during the procedure are taken into consideration.

According to Article 1(2),
‘the decision of the competent authority or
authorities which entitles the developer to proceed with the project’. In the specific case mentioned by the
Honourable Member it does not appear, from the information supplied, that the favourable opinion

‘development consent’ means:

C 84 E/894

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

granted by the Friuli Venezia Giulia Region on 5 December 2003 by deliberation No 3949 to a
preliminary project represents a ‘development consent’ in the sense of the Directive. Therefore, it may be
presumed that the procedure has not yet been concluded.

As regards Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of
wild fauna and flora (2), analogous considerations apply: to the extent that development consent to the
project has not yet been issued, it is not possible to identify, at this stage, a violation of the provisions of
this Directive.

Furthermore, the fact that negative opinions have been expressed by consulted stakeholders in relation to
the preliminary high-speed train project Venezia-Trieste, section Ronchi-Trieste, is not, per se, an element
contrary to Directive 85/337/EEC nor an obstacle for granting development consent, provided that the
requirements laid down in this Directive are complied with. The information provided by the Honourable
Member is not sufficient to deduce, in this specific case, that any of the requirements imposed by the
above mentioned Directives have not been complied with. The Commission remains, however, open to
consider any possible further information provided by the Honourable Member on this specific case.

(1) Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private

projects on the environment as amended by Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997.

(2) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

(2004/C 84 E/0987)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0844/04

by Ulpu Iivari (PSE) to the Commission

(9 March 2004)

Subject: Aid to shipbuilding in breach of EU legislation

In recent months Finnish shipyards have lost out in several competitive bidding procedures to the Italian
state-owned company Fincantieri, which has been able to offer customers markedly lower prices than its
rivals. According to various avowed expert opinions,
Italy is probably paying state aid to shipping
companies that have their vessels built and registered in Italy.

Overseeing the internal market is one of the Commission’s prime tasks. What steps will the Commission
take to ensure that EU competition legislation is observed in the shipbuilding sector?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(2 April 2004)

The Commission’s state aid department
assessment of notified state aid cases and schemes,
investigations on its own initiatives.

is actively following the shipbuilding sector,

through the
investigations linked to complaints and through

The Commission is not aware of state aid to shipping companies that have their vessels built in Italy, with
the exception of a type of aid that has been authorised by the Commission and which could, in principle,
be provided by all Member States. This concerns contract related aid (1) for ships contracted until the end
of 2000 and delivered before the end of 2003.

The Commission has currently one proceeding according to Article 88(3) of
the EC Treaty open
concerning state aid to Italian shipbuilding (2). This concerns a guarantee scheme to shipbuilding, but to
the knowledge of the Commission no guarantees have yet been provided based on this scheme.

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 1540/98 of 29 June 1998 establishing new rules on aid to shipbuilding, OJ L 202,

18.7.1998.

(2) OJ C 145, 21.6.2003.