Impact of European legislation on the outermost regions?
19.11.2007
WRITTEN QUESTION E-5891/07
by Paulo Casaca (PSE) and Emanuel Jardim Fernandes (PSE)
to the Commission
The European Parliament legislative resolution P6_TA(2007)0505 of 13 November 2007 on a proposal for a directive including aviation activities in the scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community did not incorporate two amendments tabled by the Socialist Group (Amendments 97 and 99) calling for the application of the directive to Europe's outermost regions to be suspended pending an impact assessment on its application.
Bearing in mind the Presidency conclusions (No 16, 15-16 December 2005) and the conclusions of the Environment Council ( No 6, 2 December 2005), the interinstitutional agreement on better law-making[1] and the Commission guidelines on impact assessment (SEC(2005)0791 as amended on 15 March 2006);
Bearing in mind that the option followed in the Commission proposal — to include the outermost regions in EU territory and to include all flights arriving at and departing from European airports — was not evaluated in the impact assessment (IA);
Bearing in mind that the IA did not assess traffic from the outermost regions to third countries because it mistakenly supposed that the proposal would not affect this traffic and, whilst recognising that these regions are responsible for more than 10 % of all emissions covered by an intra-Community scheme, it took no account of their small economic weight in the EU economy, and given that these two factors mean that the impact of the directive will be greater in these regions than the European average;
Bearing in mind that the IA did not take account of tourism as the main economic activity in the outermost regions, or the fact that — owing to the long distances involved — the impact of the emissions scheme will be particularly significant, or the dramatic consequences for their competitiveness that will result from a tax burden on air services from which their neighbours are exempt;
Does the Commission not consider the study called for by the Socialist Group to be useful and necessary, even if it does not have suspensory effect?
- [1] OJ C 321, 31.12.2003, p. 1.
OJ C 191, 29/07/2008