How Does the Council View the Discrepancy Which Exists Between the Rigorous Application of the Need to Respect Certain Fundament

C 174 E/20 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 19.6.2001

How does the Council view the discrepancy which exists between the rigorous application of the need to respect certain fundamental rights in the applicant countries, and the blatant failure to observe such rights in certain Member States such as France and Greece? Does the Council intend to mandate Mr Max Van der Stoel to draw up a report reviewing and assessing respect for minorities inside the European Union?

(8 March 2001)

The Council can only endorse the Honourable Member’s analysis of the attitude to be taken in regard to the applicant countries concerning certain fundamental principles and values which are at the basis of the Union’s very existence. Compliance with the political criteria laid down by the Copenhagen European Council stable institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights, respect for and protection of minorities is a pre-condition for any accession and the Union has the necessary means to verify such compliance on the part of the applicant countries. As is clear from Articles 6 and 7 of the TEU, moreover, the Union is a community of shared values.

(2001/C 174 E/019) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3147/00 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(6 October 2000)

Subject: EU financing of the planning and construction of a motorway through the Kresna gorge nature conservation area in Bulgaria

1. Is the Commission aware of the Bulgarian government’s intention to build a motorway through the valley of the Struma, which flows north to south in Western Bulgaria, to form part of Transeuropean Corridor No 4 leading from Bulgaria’s capital, Sofia, to the Greek port of Thessaloniki? Is the commission aware that Phare (cross-border cooperation programme) and the European Investment Bank are already making a contribution to the planning of this road by the Italian firm SPEA Ingeneria Europea?

2. Is the Commission also aware that the plans for the motorway assume a route through the gorge north of the city of Kresna rather than the more costly variant of a tunnel outside the Kresna gorge as advocated by nature and environmental organisations?

3. Can the Commission confirm that the Kresna gorge is the most important area in Bulgaria for the protection of unique species of trees, snakes and tortoises which are characteristic of the Balkans and that because of the great wealth of biodiversity and natural features this area qualifies for inclusion in Natura 2000, the European ecological network, while if this virgin environment is preserved the city of Kresna can develop as a centre for tourism based on nature, the countryside and health?

4. Does the Commission agree that road construction and air pollution radically encroaching on the Kresna gorge and the suburbs of Kresna would not only exceed the economic capability of the city of Kresna but would also violate the Convention of Bern (in particular Article 4) and following Bulgaria’s accession to the European Union Directives 92/43 and 79/409? Is the Commission therefore prepared to help prevent natural areas being destroyed and ecological areas being bisected with EU money which subsequently have to be protected from the time when they form part of EU territory?

5. In anticipation of Bulgaria’s possible accession to the European Union, is the Commission prepared to work towards a situation where

(a) not only part, but the whole, of the Kresna area with its major natural features is designated an area to be protected, 19.6.2001 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 174 E/21

(b) the design phase is based on a modified route and/or construction of a tunnel for the motorway so that no further costs are incurred for a variant which runs counter to the interests of nature and the environment,

(c) the provision of European financial contributions for the building of the motorway, as intended by the Bulgarian government under the ISPA, is made conditional on the natural features of the Kresna gorges being retained and no ecological corridors being destroyed within that area?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(22 December 2000)

1. The Commission is aware that the Bulgarian government intends to build a motorway through the valley of the Struma as part of Trans-European Corridor No 4. The Commission has approved the Phare Cross-Border Co-operation (CBC) project E-79 motorway study (BG9803 and BG99404) including the preparation of a preliminary design, feasibility study and detailed design of the Daskalovo-Kulata section. The European Investment Bank has not been asked to finance the Struma motorway. To date no request for additional Community assistance has been made. The Commission undertakes a thorough appraisal of all projects submitted by the beneficiary countries for ISPA financial assistance to ensure compliance with the requirements of the appropriate regulations. One of these requirements is for an assessment of environmental impact of the project similar to the assessment under Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 (1) amended by Council Directive 97/11/EEC of 3 March 1997 (2). It is within the context of such an EIA procedure that the environmental sensitivity of areas affected by the construction, including the Kresna gorge, should be considered.

2. The Commission will closely follow, especially through its delegation in Sofia, the planning of the Struma motorway, in order to ensure that the less damaging route for the environment is used, and that an alternative solution to that presently planned is chosen, if necessary. The Commission will facilitate meetings and dialogue between the Bulgarian authorities and the Bulgarian environmental non-govern- mental organisations (NGOs). In this context, the Commission delegation in Sofia organised meetings with the interested parties (i.e., the mayor of the town of Kresna, representatives of Bulgarian environmental NGOs, the contractor, the CBC implementing agency and the Roads implementing agency) on 1 and 13 November 2000, during which possible alternative solutions for the location of the motorway were discussed.

3. The Commission is well aware of the importance of the Kresna gorge from an environmental point of view. Different habitat types in the sense of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992, on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (3) are present in the Kresna gorge, and plant, fish, amphibian and reptilian species that fall within the annexes of the Directive live in the Kresna gorge area. For these reasons, the Commission is undertaking the actions described at point 1 and 2 aiming to preserve the status quo of this important bio-diversity area.

4. and 5. Should Bulgaria decide to ask for the inclusion of the Kresna gorge area in the Natura 2000 network, the Commission would be ready to support such a choice.

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985. (2) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997. (3) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

(2001/C 174 E/020) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3157/00 by Gerhard Hager (NI) to the Commission

(10 October 2000)

Subject: Taxation of online supplies

In June 2000 the Commission submitted a proposal for a Council Directive amending Directive 77/388/ EEC (1) on the treatment for VAT purposes of certain electronically provided services, and a proposal for a Council Regulation amending Council Regulation (EEC) 218/92 (2) on administrative cooperation in the field of indirect taxation (VAT).