EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 92001E003205

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3205/01 by Alexander de Roo (Verts/ALE), Chris Davies (ELDR),Karin Scheele (PSE), Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL)and Wolfgang Kreissl-Dörfler (PSE) to the Commission. Price or irrigation water and Spanish National Hydrological Plan.

OJ C 147E, 20.6.2002, p. 129–130 (ES, DA, DE, EL, EN, FR, IT, NL, PT, FI, SV)

European Parliament's website

92001E3205

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3205/01 by Alexander de Roo (Verts/ALE), Chris Davies (ELDR),Karin Scheele (PSE), Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL)and Wolfgang Kreissl-Dörfler (PSE) to the Commission. Price or irrigation water and Spanish National Hydrological Plan.

Official Journal 147 E , 20/06/2002 P. 0129 - 0130


WRITTEN QUESTION E-3205/01

by Alexander de Roo (Verts/ALE), Chris Davies (ELDR),Karin Scheele (PSE), Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL)and Wolfgang Kreissl-Dörfler (PSE) to the Commission

(22 November 2001)

Subject: Price or irrigation water and Spanish National Hydrological Plan

The Spanish National Hydrological Plan has recently been approved by the Spanish Parliament (Law 10/2001 of 5 July 2001). The Spanish Government wishes to apply for EU structural funding covering at least 1/3 ( 7 683 million) of the global cost of the Plan, estimated at 23 050 million.

Has the Commission examined whether this Law fulfils the requirements of the Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC(1), and in particular of its Article 9, which says that Member States shall take into account a policy of recovery of the real water costs in order to ensure an efficient use of water resources?

Is not the Commission of the opinion that the implementation of the Spanish National Hydrological Plan Law would imply a covert subvention of the water price for agriculture and tourism development purposes in certain Spanish regions? Would not it represent a case of unfair competition against other European regions?

(1) OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, p. 1.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(28 January 2002)

Spain has recently approved a national plan for water resources in law 10/2001 of 5 July 2001. The main objectives of this national plan are to consolidate the existing river-basin approach and to reallocate surface water resources within Spain to areas that are already facing, or that will face in the future, severe water shortage.

The question from the Honourable Members refers to the compatibility of the Spanish plan with the Water Framework Directive and in particular those parts of the Directive relating to pricing. First of all it must be underlined that the Member States are not required to transpose the Directive until December 2003. Secondly, the provisions of the Directive as they relate to the development of an equitable pricing policy (see below) do not become binding until 2010. Therefore, given that the Spanish authorities have several years in which to develop their approach it would be premature, at this stage, for the Commission to comment on this issue. The Honourable Members should be assured that the Commission will work very closely with all the Member States to promote a coherent and consistent approach to the implementation of all aspects of the Directive, including the pricing question.

For the record, the Water Framework Directive includes specific provisions on water charging, incentive pricing and cost-recovery. Its Article 9 specifies that: Member States shall take account of the principle of recovery of the costs of water services, including environmental and resource costs, having regards to the economic analysis conducted according to Annex III, and in accordance in particular with the polluter pays principle.

The same article also put obligations on Member States to ensure by 2010 that water-pricing policies provide adequate incentives to efficient water use and ensure a fair contribution of water uses (desegregated into at least industry, households and agriculture) to the recovery of the costs of water services. In deciding levels of cost recovery, social, economic and environmental effects of the recovery as well as the geographic and climatic conditions of the region affected may be considered.

Top