WRITTEN QUESTION E-1966/99 by Gerhard Hager (NI) to the Commission. EU project Natura 2000 ‐ Repercussions on the situation of individuals under private law.
C 225 E/38 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 8. 8. 2000 In order to grasp the extent of the problem of the often illegal use of non-Community drivers, 3. and 4. the Commission has asked the Member States to provide an overview of the diverse social, labour and transport rules applied by them in this area. Obviously this is only a first step in exploring possible ways to address this issue. Once the Commission has gained an overview of the relevant rules and details determining current practice, it will consider what action must be taken. 5. to 7. It cannot be excluded that the use of non-Community drivers on Community vehicles in intra- Community transport may have distorting effects on road haulage competition. The issue has to be analysed and solutions must be sought, as pointed out above, by preference within the framework of the diverse social, labour and transport rules applied in this area. (1) OJ C 67, 10. 3. 1999. (2000/C 225 E/038) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1966/99 by Gerhard Hager (NI) to the Commission (5 November 1999) Subject: EU project Natura 2000í ü Repercussions on the situation of individuals under private law Various Austrian federal states have registered certain areas of their territory under the EU project Natura 2000í including the Federal State of Lower Austria which has registered 31,63 % of its total surface area. Under this project, the Member States are obliged to ensure compliance with the directive on the preservation of bird life and the áflora-fauna-habitat directiveí in the designated areas. In drawing up the corresponding lists of designated areas, most landowners were neither asked nor informed even though this entails major restrictions on property rights and use. In view of this can the Commission answer the following questions: 1. What department or agency in the EU is responsible for the implementation of this project? 2. Which areas have been registered for the Natura 2000í project in the various Austrian federal states and in Lower Austria in particular? 3. What are the consequences for landowners? Can the Commission provide detailed information in this regard? 4. What legal provisions are there for owners of land in Natura 2000í registered areas to opt out of the project? 5. Can a local authority which has registered under the Natura 2000í project withdraw such a registration? 6. What are the consequences for landowners in such cases? 7. Are the actions of the Federal State of Lower Austria in registering certain areas under the Natura 2000í project without the prior consent of landowners compatible with current EU law? 8. 9. If not, what does the Commission intend to do about these illegal actions? To what extent are landowners, who are affected by the actions of their Federal State of Lower Austria which are incompatible with EU law, obliged to comply with the provisions restricting property rights contained in the abovementioned directives? If so, is the Commission of the opinion that these actions are at least questionable in the light of the provisions of the ECHR (restrictions on the rights of property owners, independence of authorities interfering with the rights of individuals under private law)? 8. 8. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 225 E/39 Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission (7 December 1999) Within the Commission the environment Directorate general oversees the implementation of the Natura 2000 network. Natura 2000, the European ecological network of special areas of conservation, involves sites designated under two environmental directives. Special protection areas (SPAs) are designated by Member States under Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds (1), and the Commission is notified. Under Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (2) Member States propose sites of Community interest (SCIs) and later designate them. The identification and selection of sites as well as definition of their boundaries for inclusion in Natura 2000 is exclusively a scientific exercise. Single landowners do not therefore have a role in this exercise. All data on the sites identified in Austria were formally communicated to the Commission by the Austrian authorities in application of the relevant criteria. There is no mechanism foreseen in the directives for the withdrawal of designated or nominated sites by Member States. However, should objections on a scientific basis occur, these should be brought to the attention of the Commission by the Member State. Seventy-three sites have been formally designated as SPAs in Austria, of which nineteen are in Lower Austria, and 113 sites have been formally proposed as SCIs in Austria, of which nineteen are in Lower Austria. For details on each site the Honourable Member is kindly invited to address the Austrian authorities. As far as detailed information on consequences for landowners is concerned, it should be noted that directives are binding as to the result to be achieved, but leave to the national authorities the choice of form and methods. The Natura 2000 network is based on the principle of subsidiarity. It is up to the Member States to determine how best to conserve the sites that are identified as being of Community importance. The consultation of landowners is not mentioned in the directives and is a matter for the Austrian authorities to decide. Any decision on whether or not to consult and its consequences, including the fulfilment of international treaties, is up to them. The inclusion of areas in Natura 2000 is not intended as a block on human activities. The emphasis is on ensuring that human activities are sustainable and not damaging to the conservation values. Management plans, involving owners and users, can be a valuable tool in addressing this objective. (1) OJ L 103, 25. 4. 1979. (2) OJ L 206, 22. 7. 1992. (2000/C 225 E/039) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1968/99 by Piia-Noora Kauppi (PPE-DE) to the Commission (5 November 1999) Subject: Definition of peat in the Directive on the taxation of energy products In its proposal for a Council Directive restructuring the Community framework for the taxation of energy products (COM(97) 0030 ü C4-0155/97 ü 97/0111(CNS)) (1), the Commission also deals with the taxation of peat. In Finland, for example, peat bogs are an important natural resource, and the turf squares cut out from them cover some 7 % of Finlandís energy requirement. Some 6 500 people derive their livelihood either directly or indirectly from peat production. As yet, peat has not been classified as a renewable energy source like wood. In fact, peat is a renewable natural resource comparable with wood, with a longer cycle of renewal. The use of peat is essential if we are seeking to use renewable natural resources in energy production. Without the co-use of peat, wood-burning boilers could not be sufficiently productive and would not be profitable. Peat is only used in local energy production, and thus has no influence on the European internal market