WRITTEN QUESTION P-0342/01

by Reinhold Messner (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(6 February 2001)

Subject: Community contribution to tourist infrastructure in Valesia and on Monterosa

In its answer to my Written Question P-3610/00(1), the Commission said that it was not aware of the situation described and would take the appropriate steps to gather detailed information on the subject and ensure compliance with Community law.

60 % of the Community contribution of ITL 4 943 billion for the cableway between Valsesia and Valle di Gressoney has been allocated, with the remainder to be made available once the project has been approved.

This contribution has actually been used for a road rising to a height of 2 500 m, which was built without the necessary authorisations and about which the Committee for the Defence of Monterosa has lodged regular complaints with the relevant authorities (without receiving any reply).

Does the Commission not think that the payment of the remainder of the Community contribution should be suspended until the inquiry procedure has been completed, particularly as regards the protection of the site of Community importance concerned by the project in question?

(1) OJ C 163 E, 6.6.2001, p. 179.

Supplementary answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(28 June 2001)

According to information received from the Piedmont Region authorities, no legal proceedings have been initiated in respect of the project.

The road the Honourable Member refers to was built on the authorisation of the Direzione Economia Montana e Foreste Settore Gestione Proprieta Forestali Regionali e Vivaistiche(1) and the Direzione Pianificazione e Gestione Urbanistica Settore Gestione Beni Ambientali(2) of the Piedmont Region.

The Commission points out that those authorisations stipulate that once the works for the cableway are completed, the road, which is temporary and necessary for the works in question, is to be covered over with grass and the initial section replanted with beech.

As regards the cable-car project within the proposed Site of Community Importance (pSCI) under Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora(3), mentioned by the Honourable Member in his earlier Written Question P-3610/00(4), the Commission has opened an own-initiative case and sent a request for information to the Italian authorities, which have not yet replied.

Article 6 of the abovementioned Directive provides for protection requirements with reference to Special Conservation Areas (SCA). Under Article 4(5) of that Directive, these requirements also apply to Sites of Community Importance (SCI) where they are adopted in accordance with the procedure

laid down in Article 4(2) on the basis of the list of pSCI. At present, SCA have not been designated and the list of the SCI has not been adopted. However, with reference to pSCI, in particular where they include priority habitats and species, Member States have certain obligations to act in such a way as to ensure that the aims of the Directive are not jeopardised. Even in the absence of a Community list of protected habitats and species, Member States are advised at least to abstain from all activities that may cause a proposed site to deteriorate.

Should the Commission learn that Community law is being breached in the specific case, as the guardian of the EC Treaty it will not hesitate to take all necessary measures, including possible recourse to infringement procedures under Article 226 (ex-Article 169) of the EC Treaty.

(1) Decision No 370 of 11 April 2000.

(2) Decision No 37 of 31 March 2000.

(3) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

(4) OJ C 163 E, 6.6.2001.