WRITTEN QUESTION E-0827/04 by María Sornosa Martínez (PSE)and Bárbara Dührkop Dührkop (PSE) to the Commission. Extension of San Sebastián airport.
Date: 2004-03-15
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Spain, airport, application of EU law, environmental impact, environmental law, impact study, protected area

C 84 E/678

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

(2004/C 84 E/0764)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0827/04

by María Sornosa Martínez (PSE)
and Bárbara Dührkop Dührkop (PSE) to the Commission

(15 March 2004)

Subject: Extension of San Sebastián airport

In its reply to Written Questions E-2245/03 and E-2246/03 (1), the Commission states that the Spanish
authorities consider the purpose of the San Sebastián airport master plan to be its internal restructuring
and there are no plans to extend the runway. The Spanish authorities also insist that the plan does not
have the same level of detail as a project, and consequently it is not subject to Community legislation on
impact assessment.

Nevertheless, the information contained in the master plan shows that:

(cid:1) the purpose of the planned work (parking area, parking platform for aircraft, extension of the terminal
building) is to adapt the airport to the increase in air traffic and make it possible for larger aircraft to
use the airport (which invariably requires an increase in the size of the runway);

(cid:1) the work will have an adverse impact on the SCI ES 2120015 and SPA 37 sites given that, as the plan
itself acknowledges, it will be necessary to: seal more land, thereby reducing the size of the wetland,
with the consequent repercussions on the protected species referred to in Written Question E-1701/
02 (2); extend the car-park, which will affect the watercourse that has a direct influence on the
ecosystem in which these protected species live; fill in and level off the strip of land at the side of the
runway, which will affect the intertidal area adjacent to the SPA, etc.

The Commission:

(cid:1) In view of these facts, can it continue to affirm that the sole purpose of the master plan submitted is

to restructure the airport without extending the runway?

(cid:1) Does it not consider that not treating the master plan as an extension project represents an attempt by
the Spanish authorities to carry out the work while side-stepping the legislation on impact assessment?

(cid:1) Does it not believe that, in view of the possible impact on Natura 2000 sites, the legislation which

prevails is at all events Article 6 of the Habitats Directive?

(1) OJ C 51 E, 26.2.2004, p. 230.
(2) OJ C 301 E, 5.12.2002, p. 213.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(16 April 2004)

As indicated in its answers to Written Questions E-1701/02, E-3417/02 (1), E-2245/03 and E-2246/03 by
the Honourable Members, the Commission asked the Spanish authorities to provide complete information
on the above-mentioned subject.

The complete issue in question was examined, ‘inter alia’, with the Spanish authorities in the framework of
the package meeting held on 23 October 2003. The Commission expressed its concerns regarding
compliance with the Community Environmental Law applicable to the case.

The national authorities informed the Commission that they have abandoned the idea to extend the airport
runway as well as the extension and closure of the parking area foreseen in the airport Master Plan in
order not to affect the nearby Natura 2000 sites. Furthermore, the Member State committed itself to carry
out a single environmental impact assessment (EIA) on the remaining activities covered by the project
implementing the Master Plan. By letter dated 4 December 2003, the national authorities confirmed this
information and announced that the EIA is currently in progress.

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/679

Since the Spanish authorities have expressed their intention to submit to the Commission the outcome of
the environmental assessment procedure, expected by the 2nd quarter of 2004, the Commission will then
examine the legal questions arising from this file regarding the full compliance with Community
Environmental Law.

(1) OJ C 155 E, 3.7.2003.

(2004/C 84 E/0765)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0836/04

by Regina Bastos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(8 March 2004)

Subject: Distortion of competition in the wine sector

On 23 February 2004 the Commission approved new rules on the labelling of wine in the European
Union, which will enable third countries to use, within the Community, traditional descriptions for wine
such as ‘tawny’, ‘vintage’, ‘ruby’ etc. and to export such wines to the EU.

The following facts should be borne in mind:

(cid:1) the port wine-producing area has always used the descriptions ‘tawny’, ‘vintage’ and ‘ruby’;

(cid:1) Madeira wine-producers have also always used the descriptions ‘canteiro’,

‘frasqueira’ and ‘reserva

velha’;

(cid:1) both these wines have consolidated their quality and international image using these expressions;

(cid:1) the new labelling rules will ‘trivialise’ the use of these expressions to the detriment of port and Madeira

wine producers and their products, which in effect constitutes a distortion of competition;

(cid:1) in the context of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) negotiations, the European Union has always

upheld the need to adopt a balanced agreement, particularly important for non-tariff issues;

(cid:1) these non-tariff measures include the protection of designations of origin, trademarks, etc.;

(cid:1) the WTO negotiations have been suspended since the collapse of the Cancun Round last September;

(cid:1) in this context the European Union must not or should not make any concessions outside the

negotiating context of the WTO.

Can the Commission say what induced it to adopt new rules on wine labelling outside the WTO

1.
negotiating framework?

2. What it considers the European Union has gained by this unusual and unexpected concession?

3. What its assessment is of the consequences of this decision for Community producers (cid:1) in particular
those in the port and Madeira wine producing areas?