WRITTEN QUESTION E-0707/04 by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission. Creation of a waste disposal site in the Monte Catillo nature reserve at Tivoli.
Date: 2004-03-10
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Italy, application of EU law, environmental impact, environmental law, environmental protection, impact study, nature reserve, waste management

C 84 E/660

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

‘general government’. However,

The Commission does not support any proposals to exclude specific spending items from the calculation
of expenditures of
in order to achieve the Lisbon and Gothenburg
objectives, it is important to increase the quality of public expenditures by redirecting public spending
towards growth-enhancing cost-effective public spending. The Commission has regularly recommended in
the Broad Economic Policy Guidelines to redirect public spending along these lines and this has indeed
always been supported by the Parliament and the Council. Redirecting public expenditure would, therefore,
enhance the contribution of both national and EU budgets to the achievement of Lisbon and Gothenburg
objectives.

(1) ESA95.
(2) OJ L 310, 30.11.1996.

(2004/C 84 E/0744)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0707/04

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(10 March 2004)

Subject: Creation of a waste disposal site in the Monte Catillo nature reserve at Tivoli

The Italian press recently reported that the town council of Tivoli (RM) has decided to set up an ‘ecological
platform’ with the relevant infrastructure on council land in the village of La Prece located in the territory
of the Monte Catillo nature reserve, the environment and landscape of which are under a number of
protection orders.

The council
land was handed over by the municipality to ASA Spa, a company owned by the local
authority and involved in waste collection. The ‘ecological platform’ is supposed to include a dump for
storage, differentiated waste collection and the disposal of inorganic waste, all located in the nature reserve.

In view of this, can the Commission say:

1. whether a prior environmental

impact assessment has been carried out

to ascertain whether

conditions are suitable for siting the dump in the village mentioned;

2. whether the local council’s decision to hand the land over to ASA Spa complies with the directives on
the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment and on making
information available to the public (85/337/EEC (1) and 97/11/EC (2)) and the directive on the
assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment (2001/42/EC (3));

3. whether the decision to set up the ‘ecological platform’ complies with those directives?

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40.
(2) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997, p. 5.
(3) OJ L 197, 21.7.2001, p. 30.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(16 April 2004)

The project for a waste disposal site in the Monte Catillo nature reserve at Tivoli, mentioned by the
Honourable Member, appears to be covered by 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. It could fall into one of the classes of projects listed under Annex II
of the Directive. Article 4, paragraph 2, of Directive 85/337/EEC, modified, provides that for projects listed
in Annex II, Member States are obliged to determine, through a case-by-case examination or setting
thresholds or criteria, whether it needs to be made subject to an environmental
impact assessment
procedure in accordance with Articles 5 to 10.

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/661

However, the Commission cannot be aware of all situations which are likely to be considered as a bad
application of environmental Community law by the competent authorities of the Member States. Such
situations are normally drawn to the attention of the Commission by letters of complaint, Parliamentary
Written Questions and Petitions to the Petitions Committee of the Parliament and they need to be precisely
described so as to enable the Commission to assess them in relation to applicable Community
environmental law.

In this specific case, on the basis of the information given by the Honourable Member, the Commission is
not in a position to take a view on the subject matter. In light of the above, the Honourable Member is
kindly requested to give more information on the matter in order to enable the Commission to assess the
case according to the relevant Community law.

As regards Directive 2001/42/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2001 on the assessment
of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment, the deadline for Member States to
transpose this Directive is 21st July 2004. Therefore, at present, Member States are not yet obliged to
apply the provisions of this Directive in their legal system.

(2004/C 84 E/0745)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0711/04

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(10 March 2004)

Subject: Specific characteristics of mountain regions and Community policy

Mountain regions are of genuine public interest, in environmental, social and cultural terms, and represent
an exceptional heritage which must not only be preserved but, above all, properly promoted. This requires
adequate policies to stabilise population figures for these areas, and promote their development.

As the Mountain Areas Local Authorities Section of
the National Association of Portuguese Local
Authorities stressed at a recent meeting, mountain areas need to be integrated into Structural Fund policy,
recognition of their specific characteristics needs to be ensured, the various sectoral policies need to be
combined within a global mountain policy which is equipped with instruments tailored to the needs of
these areas and their inhabitants; and there has to be full acknowledgement of the need for solutions, for
the wherewithal to take action, and for particular attention to the problem of mountain areas.

Does the Commission intend to:

1. Acknowledge fully and effectively the particular features and diversity of mountain regions?

2.

Put mountain regions on the EU’s political agenda and bring them within the Structural Funds
framework?

3. Create a Community political instrument for the mountain regions?

4.

Establish better harmonised response procedures for proposals at mountain region level and for the
management or Community funds in this connection?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(21 April 2004)

The Commission shares the Honourable Member’s interest in the place of the mountain regions in
Community policies.

In October 2002 the Commission organised a conference on ‘Community policies and mountains’, which
brought together around 500 participants from the political, economic and social spheres in the fifteen
Member States and the candidate countries.