WRITTEN QUESTION P-1974/99 by Theodorus Bouwman (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Interreg, URBAN, partnership and sustainable development.
C 219 E/56 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 1. 8. 2000 During the Transport Council, there was a substantial degree of agreement on two issues: the obligation for the Member States to notify the restrictions in advance to the Commission for the sake of greater transparency; and the harmonisation of the scope of the restrictions which means that a common list of exceptions will be established. However, the issue of restrictions during the weekends and public holidays is still pending. The strength of feeling on the subject in both the Council and Parliament is leading to polarised position being taken. Therefore, the Commission intends to adopt and present to Council and Parliament by the end of 1999 a revised proposal which aims to take into account on the one hand the implications for the internal market of the restrictions to the circulation of heavy goods vehicles on the Trans European road network, and on the other hand the need to ensure that due consideration is given to the limitations adopted by Member States for legitimate and justified reasons. (2000/C 219 E/066) WRITTEN QUESTION P-1974/99 by Theodorus Bouwman (Verts/ALE) to the Commission Subject: Interreg, URBAN, partnership and sustainable development (19 October 1999) The European Commission adopts today (14 October 1999) the Guidelines for the new Community Initiatives Interreg and URBAN. Pillars of this yearís reform of the Structural Funds are the principles of partnerships and sustainable development. Two other recent communications from the Commission have similar objectives: the European Spatial Development Perspective, which was also discussed at the informal meeting of the EU ministries on urban and regional planning held in Tampere, on 4-5 October 1999, and the Framework for Action on Sustainable URBAN Development. Parliamentís resolutions on the two Commissionís communications request the Commission to give an appropriate follow-up to its two strategic documents (1). Can the Commission explain how it intends to make sure that the broadest range of national, local and regional partners, including local authorities and NGOs, can take part in the conception, implementation and follow-up of the projects financed under Interreg and URBAN? Will partnership be playing a selective role in the choice of the projects? How will the Commission make sure that the philosophy of the European spatial Development Perspective and the Framework for Action on Sustainable URBAN Development as well as the recommendations of the European Parliament on these two communications, will be respectively shaping structural interven- tions financed under Interreg and those under URBAN? In particular, will sustainable regional and local car-free transport schemes and ecological urban renewal will be considered priority areas to be supported? (1) See EP reports by Mr Novo Belenguer (A4-0206/98, resolution adopted on 2 July 1998) ü OJ C 226, 20. 7. 1998, p. 42 and by Mr Orlando (A4-0247/1999, resolution adopted on 4 May 1999). Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission (18 November 1999) The adoption on 13 October 1999 by the Commission of the draft guidelines for the Interreg and URBAN Community initiatives (1) constituted the first step in the overall approval process for these two initiatives. In line with the code of conduct on the implementation by the Commission of structural policies, the Commission will ensure that the opinions of the Parliament are taken into consideration before the final adoption of the guidelines. As indicated in paragraph 7 of the draft Interreg guidelines and paragraph 9 of the draft URBAN guidelines, the Commission will ensure that strong partnership will be one of the governing principles of both Community initiatives in the next programming period. 1. 8. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 219 E/57 The Commission considers that the European spatial development perspective and the framework for action on sustainable URBAN development should inform in the preparation of Interreg and URBAN programmes respectively. This is clearly stated in paragraph 14 of the draft Interreg guidelines and paragraph 6 of the draft URBAN guidelines. In accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, the types of measures and projects to be supported are for the local partnership to decide. However, in the indicative list of eligible measures set out in Annex 1 of the draft URBAN guidelines, there is specific mention of the creation of car-free areas and urban renewal activities. (1) COM(1999) 479 final and COM(1999) 477 final. (2000/C 219 E/067) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1977/99 by Ursula Schleicher (PPE-DE) to the Commission (5 November 1999) Subject: Regional planning and building projects in the Sintra-Cascais natural park in Portugal Is the Commission aware that efforts are being made to build on parts of the Sintra-Cascais natural park, e. g. in the Cabo Raso and Abano areas, which would cause lasting damage to the park? Is the Commission prepared to bring pressure to bear on the competent bodies in Portugal to uphold Community efforts at nature conservation and to protect the Natura 2000 network? Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission (6 December 1999) The Commission has taken note of the case set out by the Honourable Member, and will be registering it. The Sintra-Cascais natural park does coincide in part with the site of Community importance (SCI) of the same name which Portugal put forward for inclusion in the Natura 2000 network in accordance with Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (1). The Commission will therefore make sure that the Portuguese authorities comply with Community law on nature protection. To that end, a letter will be sent to them drawing their attention to the case in question and reminding them of their obligations under Community law, in particular those imposed by Article 6 of Directive 92/43/EEC, which stipulates that any project not directly connected with or necessary to the management of a Natura 2000 site but likely to have a significant effect thereon must be subject to appropriate assessment of its implications for the site in view of the siteís conservation objectives. (1) OJ L 206, 22. 7. 1992. (2000/C 219 E/068) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1978/99 by Ursula Schleicher (PPE-DE) to the Commission (5 November 1999) Subject: Draft Commission communication on the application of Articles 92 and 93 of the EC Treaty to state aid in the form of loan guarantees The draft communication forwarded to the Member States in January 1999 has created widespread uncertainty in the credit sector. Publication of this communication has substantially undermined the sectorís confidence in a guarantee instrument with legal certainty. It would result in savings banks and other banks granting credits being unable to take up such credit guarantees, with the result that retroactively they would have to assume ü without any prior warning ü the insolvency risk of businesses in receipt of loans