WRITTEN QUESTION P-2603/99 by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission. Italy's postponement of the application of the framework directives on waste.
C 225 E/182 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 8. 8. 2000 Since the pertinent Community rules have primacy and are directly applicable in the legal systems of the Member States, citizens of the Union may assert their right to freedom of movement vis-à-vis the national authorities. (1) Case C-473/93 Commission v Luxembourg [1996] ECR I-3207. (2) OJ C 72, 18. 3. 1988. (3) In this connection, see the above Court judgment, paragraph 27. (2000/C 225 E/202) WRITTEN QUESTION P-2603/99 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission (16 December 1999) Subject: Italyís postponement of the application of the framework directives on waste In Italy the átax on wasteí (Tarsu) has been unjustly calculated on the basis of the surface area of dwellings rather than the number of tenants, which would be fairer. The Italian Government should have changed the law this year, but during the debate on the budget it decided to table an amendment to postpone the changes for yet another year. The introduction of the new legislation on waste was already postponed last year on the grounds that local government was not yet ready for it. The Ronchií Decree, which transposes Directives 91/156/EEC (1) and 94/62/EC (2), is therefore still not being applied in Italy, or only to a very small extent, despite the decree-laws of 8 November 1997 and the two decree-laws of 5 February and 1 April 1998, which do not seem to have fully transposed the directives. This further postponement has resulted in the absence of a sound framework for waste policy, as well as the unfair application of a tax based on unacceptable criteria, which penalises many elderly and poor people, because it is precisely old people who live alone in large houses. Furthermore, it also penalises businesses which, although they produce little waste, have to pay as much as those which produce enormous quantities (for example a clothing shop compared with a restaurant). In view of the above, can the Commission say: 1. whether measures have been taken against Italy for its failure to apply the above-mentioned directives in their entirety; 2. whether this postponement distances Italy even farther from Community directives and policies on waste; 3. whether it does not consider it appropriate to call on the competent authorities to prevent this further postponement from distancing Italy even farther from Community policies on waste; 4. what its general view of the whole matter is? (1) OJ L 78, 26. 3. 1991, p. 32. (2) OJ L 365, 31. 12. 1994, p. 10. Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission (20 January 2000) The Honourable Member criticises a new amendment of Decree No 22 of 5 February 1997 on waste, which transposes Directives 75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on waste (1), as amended by 91/156/EEC, 91/689/EEC of 12 December 1991 (2) on hazardous waste, and 94/62/EC of 20 December 1994 on packaging and packaging waste, because it would again postpone the adoption of the modifications to the criteria to be applied to calculate the amount payable under the urban waste tax in Italy. At present, the amount of the tax is calculated on the basis of the surface area of the single living units or commercial 8. 8. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 225 E/183 units concerned, so that it penalises people living alone and businesses which produce little waste but are placed on wide surface areas. In accordance with the original version of the Decree No 22 of 5 February 1997, new criteria, better approaching the proportion of the tax amount to the quantity of waste produced, should have been adopted as from 1 January 1999. The circumstance to which the Honourable Member makes reference could be relevant to Article 15 of Directive 75/442/EEC, as modified by Directive 91/156/EEC (hereinafter the Directive). This Article states that, in accordance with the ápolluter paysí principle, the cost of disposing of waste must be borne by: the holder who has waste handled by a waste collector or by an undertaking as referred to in Article 9, and/or the previous holders or the producer of the product from which the waste came. The Commission considers that, under the present Italian legislation, the cost of disposing of waste is borne by the holders who have waste handled by a waste collector. This is in line with Article 15 of the Directive. In addition, the Commission recognizes that the above mentioned criterion may result in disproportion among the polluters as regards the amount to be paid in comparison with the quantity of waste produced. In particular, the Commission recognizes that the way Italy makes citizens pay for their waste is not an incentive to bring about waste prevention and therefore it is not in line with the 1996 review of the Community strategy for waste management (3). Making citizens pay for waste according to the quantities of waste produced is an effective way to contribute to waste minimization. However, on the basis of the elements given by the Honourable Member, it is not evident that any disproportion resulting from the current Italian approach is of a gravity that would infringe Article 15 of the Directive. Infringement proceedings currently open against Italy for non conformity with the Directives mentioned by the Honourable Member concern the obligation to report under Article 8. 3 of Directive 91/689/EEC and Article 12 of Directive 75/442/EEC, as amended by Directive 91/156/EEC, the obligation to draw up waste management plans (under Directives 75/442/EEC on waste, as amended by 91/156/EEC, 91/689/ EEC on hazardous waste, and 94/62/EC on packaging), the application of the waste regulation system to food waste at regional level (under Directives 75/442/EEC on waste, as amended by 91/156/EEC), and the requirements for the exemption from the permit for undertakings which carry out hazardous waste recovery (under Directive 91/689/EEC on hazardous waste). (1) OJ L 194, 25. 7. 1975. (2) OJ L 377, 31. 12. 1991. (3) COM(96) 399 final. (2000/C 225 E/203) WRITTEN QUESTION P-2606/99 by John Cushnahan (PPE-DE) to the Commission (22 December 1999) Subject: Early retirement pension scheme Can the Commission confirm if there is going to be an increase in payment in the new early retirement pension scheme next year? If so, will those already receiving this pension through the old scheme, qualify for this increase? Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (18 January 2000) The new Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 of 17 May 1999 on support for rural development from the European agricultural guidance and guarantee fund (1) allows an increase of the maximum amounts eligible for Community support under the measure of early retirement which may be integrated in the framework of the rural development plans proposed by the Member States for the period 2000-2006. The increased aid amounts for early retirement would also only apply to new applicants to the scheme. Nevertheless, given that commitments under the existing scheme Council Regulation (EEC) No 2079/92 of 30 June 1992 instituting a Community aid scheme for early retirement from farming (2), should be integrated into the new rural development programming, it is not entirely excluded that the aid amounts