You are on page 1of 2


2001 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 26 E/7

Supplementary answer
given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(10 March 2000)

The Commission thanks the Honourable Member for again drawing its attention to the question of the
legal protection of European companies in Kosovo and for having forwarded extra documentation on this
sensitive subject.

The protection of legal rights of companies in Kosovo is a question falling under the direct competence of
the United Nations interim administration mission in Kosovo (UNMIK) according to the United Nations
Security Council Resolution 1244 (1999). The complete file concerning the issue is in the possession of
UNMIK, which is the only entity in a position to make valid proposals for the requested action.

(2001/C 26 E/008) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2653/99
by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Commission

(12 January 2000)

Subject: Events at Malpensa

In order to forestall the accusation that the decrees of 5 July 1996 and 13 October 1997 transferring all
flights from Linate to Malpensa did not comply with the provisions of Community law, an Italian
Government decree provided that 34 % of European flights would remain at Linate until access infra-
structure had been fully completed and notification had been received that the work was finished.

Is the Commission aware of the inconveniences which users of the Malpensa hub still experience,
especially through the lack of suitable buildings, the fact that the train shuttle still does not serve
terminal 2, forcing passengers to drag their baggage along and to use the taxi or bus shuttle service
between terminals 1 and 2 (services that stop, what is more, at a certain time of day) and the fact that
there are still not even enough baggage-trolleys, all of which confirm the need to guarantee the survival of
Linate as an airport providing connections to the 15 Member State capitals? How does it view the fact that
the Italian Government has not yet sent the information which the Commission had asked to receive by
15 November?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(12 April 2000)

The Commission has paid and continues to pay special attention to the situation concerning Malpensa
airport, particularly as regards access and airport infrastructures. This issue is closely linked with the
problem of Italian traffic distribution rules for the various airports of the Milanese airport system
complying with Community law.

The Commission, with the help of specialised consultants, carried out several in-depth inspections in 1998
and 1999 of the state of the above infrastructures, particularly concerning their suitability for the volume
of traffic that was due to move to Malpensa when the above-mentioned traffic distribution rules were
applied. The Commission used the information from these sources to intervene in 1998, declaring the
immediate application of the rules which were initially adopted as incompatible with Community law (1).
The Italian authorities took the results of the inspections on board and decided to delay applying the rules
until October 1999, subsequently delayed to December 1999.

The Italian authorities responded to the inspections carried out by specialist consultants by deciding
in October 1999 to undertake work and improvements, particularly focusing on aspects of airport
infrastructure (providing additional departure gates, implementing an Apron Management Control system,
C 26 E/8 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 26.1.2001

improving the capacity for luggage and passport control etc.). Contrary to the view held by the honourable
Member, the Italian authorities have indeed sent the information which the Commission had asked to
receive on carrying out work and improvements. The Commission is currently checking this information.

(1) Commission Decision of 16 September 1998 on a procedure relating to the application of Council Regulation (EEC)
No 2408/92 (Case VII/AMA/11/98  Italian traffic distribution rules for the airport system of Milan). OJ L 337,

(2001/C 26 E/009) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2735/99
by Carlo Fatuzzo (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(18 January 2000)

Subject: Free entry to museums for Community citizens between the ages of 55 and 65

Cultural tourism among the 55- to 65-year old age group in Europe is a source of cultural enrichment, a
healthy way of using free time and a source of many new jobs.

Does the Commission intend to issue a directive to boost this type of tourism and to make it more

In addition, can the Commission ask the Italian minister Mr Melandri to amend the regulation published in
the Italian Official Journal No 253, 27.10.1999, which restricts free entry to monuments, museums,
archaeological sites, and parks etc. to those over the age of 65, so that it includes Community citizens
between the ages of 55 and 65?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(13 March 2000)

The Commission is aware of the importance of cultural tourism as a source of potential job creation.
However, there is no intention to issue a directive on this matter.

The question of the age group benefiting from free entry to cultural attractions in Italy is a matter for the
Member State itself, following the principle of subsidiarity.

(2001/C 26 E/010) WRITTEN QUESTION P-2750/99
by Dorette Corbey (PSE) to the Commission

(7 January 2000)

Subject: Turtles, nature conservation and accession: Cyprus

1. Is the Commission aware of the debate in Cyprus about the protection of the Akamas Peninsula,
which is an important nesting area for sea turtles? These turtle species include vulnerable and endangered
species, according to the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) list. Has the
Commission been informed about measures to protect Akamas which were approved by the Cypriot
Parliament in 1998, but have not yet been accepted by the Cabinet of Ministers? Is the Commission also
aware of the fact that hotel development in the area has meanwhile continued?

2. In view of the upcoming accession of Cyprus, has the Commission entered into discussions regarding
the suitability of the Akamas Peninsula, and particularly that the Asprokremmos, Lara and Toxeftra
beaches be included in the Natura 2000 network of protected sites, established under the Habitats and
Birds Directives (resp. 92/43 (1) of 21 May 1992 and 79/409 (2) of 2 April 1979)?