WRITTEN QUESTION E-3272/98by Kyösti Virrankoski (ELDR) to the Commission
(30 October 1998)Subject:
Designation of Natura 2000 areas in FinlandThe Finnish Government has adopted a decision on the areas to be notified to the Commission under theNatura 2000 programme. Many of them are controversial, and appeals against the government’s decision aretherefore pending before the Supreme Administrative Court.Does the Commission intend to consider and confirm the designation of the areas for inclusion in the Natura2000 programme for Finland including even those areas concerning which appeals have been lodged before the Supreme Administrative Court hands down its decision? To put it another way, does theCommission care whether the people of Finland have been treated lawfully in this regard or not?
Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission
(7 December 1998)
The list of selected sites of Community importance for Natura 2000 is set up in a step-by-step procedure,under which each Member State first proposes a national list of sites on the basis of the criteria set out inAnnex III to Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wildfauna and flora (
). This list should have been transmitted to the Commission by 10 June 1995. TheCommission then had three years, i.e. up to 10 June 1998 to establish a Community list based on the nationallists. It follows from the Directive that the Commission can adopt the final Community list only after receivingthe final version of the national list of a Member State.The Commission will take into account all the sites proposed by Finland as soon as they are officially notified.It can be noted that infringement proceedings under Article 169 of the EC Treaty are in progress againstseveral Member States including Finland.
) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3273/98by Kyösti Virrankoski (ELDR) to the Commission
(30 October 1998)Subject:
Use of indexation appropriations for Structural FundsAt the Edinburgh summit the breakdown of funding from the Structural Funds among the Member States wasagreed. As the breakdown was expressed in monetary terms on the basis of the funding available for the firstyear of the programme, the loss of value caused by inflation is corrected by means of indexationappropriations.However, the Finnish Government is proposing to the Finnish Parliament in the budget for next year thatFinland should not take up its share of the indexation appropriations unless the required national counterpartfunding is provided from a source other than the Finnish State.1. Which Member States have already during the past programming period waived part of the structuralfunding or indexation appropriations allocated to them?2. Which Member States have announced that they will not accept basic funding from the Structural Fundsor the indexation appropriations linked to them?C 289/32 EN 11.10.1999Official Journal of the European Communities