92001E1299

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1299/01

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(3 May 2001)

Subject: Nature conservation and environmental protection in Poland during the run-up to its accession to the European Union

1. How can we prevent effective legislation on nature conservation, environmental protection and animal welfare, which exists in Poland and in other applicant countries, from being watered down on the grounds that the European Union has laid down less strict rules as minimum provisions?

2. How can a solution be found to the problem that Poland protects wolves in nature conservation areas in the Carpathian Mountains, whereas those same wolves, if they cross the national border, are shot dead in the adjoining Slovakian nature conservation area?

3. What can the European Union do to help overcome the recent stalemate in the assignment to the Bialowieza National Park contained therein of the entire Polish section of the former imperial hunting ground between Hajnóvka (Podlaskie) and the Belarus border (a total area of 62 500 ha), which is now used by the state for timber extraction?

4. How can we prevent a situation whereby, during the run-up to its accession to the European Union, Poland largely ignores studies into and discussions about the possibility of alternatives, consultation of those involved and testing for compliance with European Union directives and whereby natural river banks with valuable flora and fauna are being destroyed by the energetic start being made on the construction of new dams on the River Vistula and (possibly) the River Oder near Legnica?

5. Does the Commission share the view of the Polish Government that the existing dam on the River Vistula near Wloclawek will burst within the next nine years and will, therefore, have to be demolished, renovated or replaced, in the short term and on safety grounds, by an entirely new water management system? Does it have any opinion about which solution would be preferable, if the worst came to the worst, and about what could be done to ensure that that solution could be given the best chance of implementation?

6. What possibilities exist, even before Poland becomes a Member State of the European Union, for further aid to be granted to non-governmental organisations which are active in the field of nature conservation and environmental protection in Poland in the form of subsidies similar to those granted from the environment budget to organisations in the current Member States and independent of any form of cooperation with organisations in Member States with a view to a pan-European project?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(24 June 2001)

1. By accession date, the candidate countries will have to comply with the requirements of Community environmental directives. In general, Community directives will significantly raise the level of environmental protection in the candidate countries, as Community rules are consistently stricter than their national legislation. However, as rightly noted, Community directives often set minimum standards. In this case, the candidate countries will be able to maintain or introduce more stringent environmental standards provided they comply with the procedural and substantive rules in Articles 95 (ex Article 100A) or 176 (ex Article 130T) of the EC Treaty. The Commission is unaware of any decision in the candidate countries to lower environmental standards to adjust to Community directives. The candidate countries have tended to maintain those standards that are stricter than foreseen by Community directives as this is often necessary to address the specific environmental problems faced by these countries.

2. Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora(1) provides protection for wolves. This is also the case of the Bern Convention according to which a favourable conservation status has to be secured for wolves. The Slovak Republic is a party to the Bern Convention. However, geographical restrictions exist in the Member States. Therefore, this issue will have to be discussed with the Slovak Republic in the context of the accession negotiations. If it does not want to ensure full protection for wolves in its part of the Carpathian mountains, the Slovak Republic will have to justify this and do so on sound scientific grounds based on the size of the wolves population.

3. A candidate country does not have an obligation to identify protected areas under Community legislation prior to accession. However, the Commission strongly recommends that the candidate countries respect the requirements of Community directives, notably as regards nature protection. Concerning the Bialowieza park, the Commission is aware of the proposal of the Polish Minister of Environment to extend the natural park and is following the issue closely. The Bialowieza forest is of special natural value, as it constitutes one of Europe's last virgin forests composed of leaf-trees. At present, the decision to extend the natural park is an internal Polish issue. By accession, Poland has to provide a list of sites eligible for sites of Community importance. On this basis, the procedure under Articles 4 and 5 of Directive 92/43/EEC will apply, i.e. the Commission evaluates the proposals and establishes, in agreement with Poland, a draft list of sites of Community importance. In exceptional cases, where the Commission finds that the national list fails to mention an important site, a bilateral consultation procedure shall be initiated and, if no agreement is reached, the Council, acting unanimously, shall take a decision.

4. and 5. In line with Agenda 2000 and the Council Conclusions of 24 September 1988 on accession strategies for the environment, the Commission considers that all new investments in the candidate countries should comply with the environmental acquis. This notably includes carrying out proper environmental impact assessments and respecting rules similar to those of Community legislation on nature protection.

The Commission has invited Poland to identify sites of particular natural interest for inclusion in the Natura 2000 network as well as to transpose and implement Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997 amending Directive 85/337/EEC on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment(2) (hereafter the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive). In this context, it is worth noting that Poland has recently adopted the Act on Environmental Impact Assessment which, according to Poland's official position, achieves full transposition of the Directive.

The Commission does not have sufficient information to take a position on the Wloclawek dam and the future water management of the Vistula river. However, it continues to follow the proposal to build dams on the Vistula and Odra very closely. In particular, the member of the Commission responsible for Environment has, on numerous occasions, raised this issue with the Polish authorities and, in line with the above-mentioned principle, recommended Poland carry out an environmental impact assessment, similar to Community rules, for the dams. Therefore, the Commission welcomes Poland's recent commitment that a full environmental impact assessment in line with Community requirements will be performed and stresses that this should include an evaluation of all alternatives.

6. The Commission has established good and regular contacts with environmental non-governmental organisations (NGOs) from the candidate countries and is supporting their activities. Twice a year, an informal dialogue is organised with environmental NGOs. During this dialogue, the NGOs are informed about the status of the enlargement process and are given the opportunity to express their views and opinions in order to improve the transparency of the environmental accession process. The 4th NGO dialogue was held on the 23/24 of April 2001.

The Community is granting direct support to environmental NGOs in some candidate countries through the Access programme, which aims to strengthen the civil society of the candidate countries in the field of environment and social and economic development. The Commission has also taken the initiative of establishing a grant scheme to enhance the NGOs' capacities in the accession process related to environment and is providing the possibility to support environmental NGOs through the newly established REAP facility.

Moreover, it should be kept in mind that Community environmental directives will considerably strengthen the involvement of the public, including NGOs, in the candidate countries. Several pieces of the environmental acquis already provide for this. The Directives on Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), Access to Information(3), the Air Quality Framework(4) and the new Water Framework Directive(5) are well-known examples. As a result of the alignment of candidate countries with Community directives, civil society, and notably NGOs, have already been granted an increasing insight into decisions. This will be further strengthened once Community directives are fully implemented.

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

(2) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997.

(3) Council Directive 90/313/EEC of 7 June 1990 on the freedom of access to information on the environment (OJ L 158, 23.6.1990).

(4) Council Directive 96/62/EC of 27 September 1996 on ambient air quality assessment and management (OJ L 296, 21.11.1996).

(5) Directive 2000/60/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy (OJ L 327, 22.12.2000).