WRITTEN QUESTION E-1038/00 by Monica Frassoni (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Golf course at Is Arenas, Sardinia, Italy.
20. 3. 2001 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 89 E/7 Recovering refunds from third-country exporters is not feasible. The existence of authenticity certificates would in no way resolve the problem because products which are reimported may quite legally be eligible for a reduction in, or exemption from, import duty. Since the GATT (General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade) agreementsí entry into force, it has no longer been possible to stipulate in a regulation that the importer is responsible for reimbursing the export refund on reimportation into the Community. To do so would run counter to the Communityís international obligations. Nor has it been possible to adopt the Honourable Memberís proposed approach (whereby repayment would be required only if the Community exporterís complicity could be proved) in respect of return under preferential arrangements. Someone located outside the Community could arrange for trade to be deflected by instructing firm A to export refund-eligible products to firm B for light processing in a third country, after which firm C would import them into the Community and benefit ü quite legally ü from reduced or zero import duty. Although it would be impossible to prove the Community exporterís complicity in those circumstances, the operation would have been set up solely in order to divert Community funds and nothing could be done about it. Under Article 20(4)(d) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 800/1999 of 15 April 1999 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of export refunds on agricultural products (1), the refund must be reimbursed if the exported products are reimported into the Community without having to reduced or zero customs duty at the time of undergone substantial processing and are subject reimportation. So that this clearly deterrent provision does not result in excessive restrictions for exporters, it has been applied only to certain products which are particularly sensitive to deflections of trade. Nor does the measure apply if such products are reimported under the returned goods system provided for in Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code (2) or if more than two years elapse between when they are exported from the Community and subsequently reimported. (1) OJ L 102, 17. 4. 1999. (2) OJ L 302, 19. 10. 1992. (2001/C 89 E/006) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1038/00 by Monica Frassoni (Verts/ALE) to the Commission (4 April 2000) Subject: Golf course at Is Arenas, Sardinia, Italy Two golf courses, one of which is a nine-hole experimental course, have been built in the area of Is Arenas (Narbolia and San Vero Milis municipalities) in Sardinia, which appears on the list of sites of Community interest under Directive 92/43 (1) code ITB 0002228, since it consists of coastal woodland on sandy dunes which includes priority habitats, and is in the Regional Nature Park of Sinis-Montiferru that is due to be set up. The projects were not subject to an environmental impact assessment nor were any checks carried out to establish whether there was any need for an environmental impact assessment (2). In order to build the golf courses over 10 000 pinus pinea and pinus pinaster plants have been cut down (according to information made public by the Is Arenas company itself) and profound changes to the site have occurred as a result of earth moving and flattening operations carried out using scrapers and other heavy machinery. In order to supply the water necessary for the maintenance of the greens, 18 water wells have been sunk, 11 of which are operational, and a connection to the water supply network of the Land Improvement Cooperative has been established. No data exist on the overall level of water used by the golf courses. This is a matter of concern since a standard 18-hole golf course requires a great deal of water (3) and the area has one of the lowest rainfall levels in Sardinia. The project is in danger of causing the salinisation of the entire Habitat area and the drying out of the surrounding water table, with adverse consequences for those who farm and live in the area. In addition, that fact that the land is sandy will mean that the water table will be polluted by herbicides and pesticides. C 89 E/8 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 20. 3. 2001 The golf courses are part of a property development for which the same company (Is Arenas srl) is responsible and are designed to increase the value of the properties. The cutting down of the woodlands prior to the building of the golf courses constitutes a breach, inter alia, of the Italian law on forest management (4). Has the Commission initiated infringement proceedings against the Italian State for failing to comply with the Community legislation on environmental impact assessments (Directives 85/337 and 97/11 (5))? Does the Commission intend to insist that measures are taken to repair the environmental damage? How will the cost of the environmental damage caused by the building of the golf courses be paid for, in the light of the White Paper on environmental liability (COM(2000) 66), which states that ádamage to biodiversity, which is protected in Natura 2000 areas, should be coveredí and that ásuch damage could take the form of damage to habitats, wildlife or species of plants, as defined in the annexes to the directives concernedí? (1) OJ L 206, 22. 7. 1992, p. 7. (2) See Sardinian Region Countryside Protection Office Authorisation, protocol 3365, of 18 November 1997; planning permission given by Narbolia municipality, protocol 4838 of 24 September 1997; the subsequent authorisations were given in 1998. (3) Estimates vary from 10 000 m3 of water per hectare per year (Oristano Forestry Board) to 29 200 m3 per hectare per year (Acer. Review 1/89). According to Federgolf, the water required by a golf course in the summer in Italy reaches 70-80 m3 per hectare per day. (See La Nuova Ecologia, November 1993). Given that the Is Arenas 18-hole golf course covers an area of 134 hectares, this could mean around 10 000 m3 per hectare per day! It should be noted that the company Is Arenas asked the Land Improvement Cooperative for the use of 300 000 m3 of water per hectare per year. (4) See RDI3267 and the Ministry of Agriculture and Forests Circular No 6 of 25 January 1971, which states that no exceptions should be made to the prohibition of building in woods áwhere the land is wooded, subject to hydrogeological constraints and found along the coastline and where the land has been reforested using State fundsí. Is Arenas falls into both categories. (5) OJ L 175, 5. 7. 1985 and OJ L 73, 14. 3. 1997. Annex II to these directives covers projects which involve áland reclamation for the purpose of conversion to another type of land useí. Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission (5 June 2000) Acting under Article 226 (ex Article 169) of the EC Treaty, with reference also to circumstances raised by the Honourable Member, the Commission sent a letter of formal notice to Italy for presumed breach of Council Directives 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (1) 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (2) and Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds (3). Under the above mentioned article of the EC Treaty the action of the Commission aims to assess whether the Member State concerned is in breach of Community law. Where an infringement is ascertained the Member State is obliged to comply with the relevant Community law. It may imply the adoption of measures of repair. A future Community environmental liability regime as proposed in the white paper on environmental liability (4) is indeed meant to cover liability for damage to biodiversity, namely natural resources protected under the Natura 2000 network. An exception for such damage would only apply if all requirements of Article 6(3) and 6(4) of Directive 92/43/EEC concerning a project have been complied with. However, the Community regime will not apply retroactively, but only to damage caused after the entry into force of the regime. (1) OJ L 175, 5. 7. 1985. (2) OJ L 206, 22. 7. 1992. (3) OJ L 103, 25. 4. 1979. (4) COM(2000) 66 final