EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 92000E000976

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0976/00 by Ursula Schleicher (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Continuation of the building projects in the Sintra-Cascais natural park in Portugal.

OJ C 374E, 28.12.2000, p. 194–195 (ES, DA, DE, EL, EN, FR, IT, NL, PT, FI, SV)

European Parliament's website

92000E0976

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0976/00 by Ursula Schleicher (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Continuation of the building projects in the Sintra-Cascais natural park in Portugal.

Official Journal 374 E , 28/12/2000 P. 0194 - 0195


WRITTEN QUESTION P-0976/00

by Ursula Schleicher (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(22 March 2000)

Subject: Continuation of the building projects in the Sintra-Cascais natural park in Portugal

In the answer to my Written Question E-1977/99(1) Mrs Wallström stated that she had registered the cases notified by me and sought clarification from the Porguese authorities.

Is the Commission aware that the above building projects in particular in the Cabo Raso and Abano areas notwithstanding statements by the competent national authorities to the contrary are being continued and have already resulted in considerable damage to the natural park which is visible to all and to which the Portuguese media have repeatedly drawn attention?

(1) OJ C 219 E, 1.8.2000, p. 57.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(19 April 2000)

The two building projects in the Cabo Raso and Abano areas of the Sintra-Cascais park, which has been proposed as a site of Community importance by the Portuguese authorities, were registered as case No 1999/2275.

Having examined the case, the Commission wrote to the Portuguese authorities on 4 January 2000 to draw their attention to the obligations laid down in Directives 92/43/EEC (Habitats)(1) and 85/337/EEC (Impact Assessment)(2). At the same time, it asked them for their assessment of the situation. No reply has been forthcoming.

At its meeting on 21 March 2000, taking the view that the projects were not being carried out in compliance with the above-mentioned Directives, the Commission decided to pursue the case under Article 226 (ex 169) of the EC Treaty.

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

(2) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.

Top