WRITTEN QUESTION E-2622/99 by Laura González Álvarez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Construction work in the Bustarviejo valley (Spain).
24. 10. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 303 E/83 is true that United Kingdom has imposed some national measures, which increase the cost of It slaughtering of pigs. Some informal contacts have taken place between the Commission and British authorities to discuss what form an aid might take. At the present time, however, the Commission has not received any formal notification of proposals to grant aid. In order to be acceptable any aid must of course meet the conditions laid down by the EC Treaty. In particular, the aid should facilitate the economic development of the sector. Aids which are simply intended to offset trading losses are in principle not acceptable under the Community rules. Export refunds are currently available for a wide variety of pigmeat products including fresh and frozen meat and processed products. Granting of export refunds is a great help for the European pigmeat market, and has facilitated the exports of almost 800 000 tons of pigmeat to third countries in 1999. As the pressure in Community pigmeat markets has prevailed, the Commission has kept the relatively high export refunds available since more than one year. It is true that the Commission no longer pays an extra high refund for fresh and frozen meat destined for Russia. However, these exports still benefit from the normal refund. It should be underlined that the Commission has to take into account in its refund policy the limited demand in export markets, budgetary constraints, as well as the quantitative commitments of the World trade organization agreement. The Commission has discussed other possible measures (e. g. to create voluntary based funds) with Member States on several occasions, but so far these ideas have received little support from the majority of Member States. However, the Commission continues to reflect on this issue. (2000/C 303 E/075) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2622/99 by Laura GonzÆlez `lvarez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (12 January 2000) Subject: Construction work in the Bustarviejo valley (Spain) A private company is planning to build a hotel in the Bustarviejo Valley (Community of Madrid, Spain), in the locality known as Tejeraí, the whole area of which is classified as a specially protected site where development is not permitted. According to the mayor of Bustarviejo, the project, which is the fruit of a private initiative, has obtained the necessary permits from the regional environment and public works authorities and from the local council. However, members of environmental and cultural associations, womenís groups, and huntersí and farmersí associations have pointed out that no studies have been undertaken to assess the impact on local flora and fauna, many of which are protected species, and believe that the project would seriously damage both the landscape and the environment, since the water supply would have to come from the river or from a well. They argue that the extraction of 7 000 cubic metres of water each year would affect agriculture, stock farming and forestry and that the sewage produced by more than 100 persons would certainly pose a threat of pollution to the river running through the valley. Bearing in mind that the Leader local action group in the Sierra Norte (Community of Madrid) would be contributing 16 million pesetas to the project, will the Commission say whether it complies with Directive 85/337/EC (1) on environmental impact assessment and Directive 92/43/EC (2) on natural habitats, and whether it is compatible with the objectives of the Leader programme? (1) OJ L 175, 5. 7. 1985, p. 40. (2) OJ L 206, 22. 7. 1992, p. 7. C 303 E/84 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 24. 10. 2000 Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (10 February 2000) The permit to build a youth hostel at the Sports and Nature Centre was granted to the developer Valle de los abedules S. L. by the communal authorities of Bustarviejo and is one of the prerequisites for the Galsinma local action group to be able to make a grant partly met from Community funds. The Community aid is also dependent on the hostel receiving an operating permit requirements of the implementing legislation. imposing all The national legislation on which the implementing legislation covering building and operating permits is based must take account of the Community Directives. Among the requirements must be an obligation to meet the conditions set in the report drawn up by the Directorate-General for Environmental Respect and Safety, otherwise the permit should not be issued. It must be borne in mind that the village of Bustarviejo is very close (one or two kilometres) to Cuenca de Rio Lozoya y Sierra Norte, ES3110002 proposed by Spain as a site of Community interest in the Natura 2000 network pursuant to Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora. The information given by the Honourable Member and the claims of the environmental and other associations mentioned in her question do not enable the Commission to conclude that Council Directives 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment and 92/43/EEC have not been respected. (2000/C 303 E/076) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2625/99 by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Commission (12 January 2000) Subject: EU funds for the earthquake in Umbria Since September 1997, when an earthquake devastated Umbria, thousands of people who lost their homes in the earthquake have been living in containers. Reconstruction in the earthquake-stricken areas, with the exception of certain historic monuments, has not yet begun and local people, about to face another winter, are exhausted. The European Union has earmarked funds to help the people affected by this natural disaster. Can the Commission answer the following: 1. Has it actually allocated funds to the Italian Government in respect of the above earthquake? 2. What is the amount of these funds? 3. 4. For what precisely had these funds been earmarked? For what were they actually used? 5. Will it set up a committee of inquiry on human rights to help the earthquake victims and to ascertain that the Community funds have actually been used for reconstruction and to help the displaced persons? Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (17 February 2000) By the Commission decisions of 4 August 1998 amending the decisions approving the single program- ming documents (SPDs) for Community structural assistance under Objective 5(b) in the Marche and Umbria Regions, the national authorities and the Commission provided for new operations under the SPDs