You are on page 1of 2

C 53 E/38 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 20.2.

2001

the Structural Funds (1). The Commission will notify the Spanish authorities of the situation reported by the
Honourable Member. Council Directive 76/464/EEC of 4 May 1976 on pollution caused by certain
dangerous substances discharged into the aquatic environment of the Community (2) requires the elimina-
tion of 17 substances (List I) and the reduction of a large number of other substances and groups of
substances (List II). Additional information is needed to decide whether the Directive is breached in this
particular case.

Community legislation on bathing water quality on beaches (inland waters or coastal waters) (Council
Directive 76/160/EEC of 8 December 1975 on the quality of bathing water (3)) sets quality objectives for
bathing waters, obliges Member States to achieve them, regularly monitor the quality of all bathing areas
and report their findings annually to the Commission, and calls on the Commission to publish these (last
report May 1999, next report May 2000). The report is also made available on the Internet.

For the Lugo area on the River Miño in Galicia there are at present five places identified as bathing areas
and regularly monitored. The latest report published in 1999 shows for all five a water quality complying
with the Directive. An industrial activity does not exempt a Member State from taking all measures to
comply with the quality requirements. The bathing water Directive provides two options: either the water
quality is maintained under the new conditions or the beach is closed, i.e. bathing is banned.

(1) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.


(2) OJ L 129, 18.5.1976.
(3) OJ L 31, 5.2.1976.

(2001/C 53 E/042) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0911/00


by Hiltrud Breyer (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(25 March 2000)

Subject: Infringement of the directives on natural habitats and wild fauna and flora in connection with the
extension of the Gersheim-Rubenheim golf course

1. Is the Commission aware that the planned extension of the golf course at Gersheim-Rubenheim
would have a massive impact on an area which may come under the directive on the conservation of
natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, and represents a serious threat to a habitat to be conserved as
a matter of priority, in which, inter alia, the butterfly species Eurodryas aurinia and Maculinea arion are to
be found?

2. Does the Commission take the view that a serious assessment of compatibility with the objectives
under the directive on natural habitats and wild fauna and flora can only be made where a complete
growing season has been studied?

3. Does the Commission agree that the Gersheim municipal council cannot be allowed to irresponsibly
disregard EU law?

4. Does the Commission agree that, in the face of such a flagrant breach of EU law, infringement
proceedings should be considered?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(18 May 2000)

The Commission has recently been informed about a golf course project in Gersheim/Rubenheim, the
enlargement of which might harm a potential site of Community importance, a site which should be
proposed under Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and
of wild fauna and flora (1) (Habitats Directive).
20.2.2001 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 53 E/39

So far the Commission has only been informed about the existence of one non-priority butterfly species
under Directive 92/43/EEC, without any proof by scientific literature, information about population size,
importance of the area or compensation or mitigation measures which are already foreseen.

According to this information, it is not possible to draw a conclusion on whether the area has to be
proposed as a site of Community importance according to Directive 92/43/EEC. Nor can it be said at the
moment whether the authorities have not respected Community legislation in this specific case. The
conservation of the two butterfly species mentioned by the Honourable Member might be possible on
parts of the golf course if they are maintained and managed for the conservation of their habitats and if
the appropriate compensation or mitigation measures are applied.

Given the information available so far, an infringement of Community legislation cannot be proved. The
Honourable Member is invited to provide specific and detailed information on the site to enable the
Commission to assess the case fully.

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

(2001/C 53 E/043) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0918/00


by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(25 March 2000)

Subject: Millennium Forum, Summit and Assembly in New York

What steps is the Commission taking to ensure that the proposals that will be put forward by the
Millennium Forum in May this year will be seriously considered by the Millennium Summit and Assembly
later in the year and also to ensure that the proposals become plans for actions and do not remain merely
talking points with good intentions?

(2001/C 53 E/044) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1108/00


by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission

(11 April 2000)

Subject: UN 2000 Millennium General Assembly and Summit Meeting

Does the Commission recognise the opportunity offered by the United Nations 2000 Millennium General
Assembly and Summit Meeting to address shared international concerns for peace, environmental
sustainability and poverty reduction?

Will the Commission clarify how it intends to reform and strengthen the UN on the principles of greater
efficiency and greater accountability?

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-0918/00 and E-1108/00
given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(15 May 2000)

The Commission expects that the proposals to be made by the Millennium Forum in May 2000 will be
presented at the Millennium Summit by a spokesman for the Forum. The Commission also expects that
such proposals will be discussed in the ‘round-table’ discussions, the reports of which will be annexed to
the Millennium Summit declaration.