Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the 'Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Committee of the Regions and the Economic and Social Committee - Developing the Citizens' Network - Why good local and regional passenger transport is important, and how the European Commission is helping to bring it about'
18. 5. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 138/7 Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Committee of the Regions and the Economic and Social Committee — Developing the Citizens’ Network — Why good local and regional passenger transport is important, and how the European Commission is helping to bring it about’ (1999/C 138/03) in On 13 July 1998 the Commission asked the Economic and Social Committee for an opinion, pursuance of Article 198 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned communication. The Section for Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society, which was instructed to prepare the Committee’s work on the matter, adopted its opinion on 9 March 1999. The rapporteur was Mr von Schwerin. The Committee adopted the opinion set out below at its 362nd plenary session held on 24 and 25 March 1999 (meeting of 24 March), with 89 votes in favour and three abstentions. 1. Summary — general observations 1. 1. The Committee welcomes the fact that, by submitting the present communication, the Commission reinforces the importance of the Green Paper on the Citizens’ Network and thereby helps to bring about the further development of public passenger transport and boost the scope for intermodal links. In its Executive Summary (page 2) the Commission lists a number of subjects to be dealt with in the work programme, in particular: — stimulating information exchange, — promoting benchmarking, — the establishment of the right policy framework, — the use of Community financial instruments, and — endorse the application of the subsidiarity principle. 1. 2. The Committee would, however, point out that the term ‘the citizens’ network’ has not yet become an established concept to large sections of the population and a number of experts. More action needs to be taken in this respect. The Committee hopes that the Commission will take 1. 3. concrete steps towards the creation of such a citizens’ network. With this aim in view, there is a need to set out qualitative and quantitative objectives (such as changing the modal split), backed up by practical action which may be taken to achieve these objections. 1. 4. When such action is carried out, however, account should be taken of the fact that, in accordance with the subsidiarity principle, public regional and local passenger transport is primarily the responsibility of regional and local authorities and comes under the legal responsibility of the Member States. The Commission should declare its unequivo- cal support for the subsidiarity principle also in respect of regulatory policy, rather than continuing to use the term ‘mainly’. It should continue to be possible for the competent local authorities to take decisions on matters such as the type of organization or qualitative and quantitative requirements to be met by operators, acting in the light of local requirements. 1. 5. The special requirements relating to local responsibility and an insight into the interests of transport users, reliability, punctuality, etc. in the field of public passenger transport at local level continue to justify the ban on cabotage operations in this field. Operators of public local and regional transport also have to be resident in the region concerned. 1. 6. The projects in the fields of information, research and cooperation launched by the EU Commission are furthering the development of a citizens’ network. The Committee attaches particular importance in this context to the develop- ment of quality criteria and projects such as benchmarking in respect of transport systems. The projects should therefore focus, in particular, on qualitative criteria in respect of the provision of services, in addition to economic criteria, and also consider the interaction between the various transport modes. Other means of promoting public mobility, such as systems of cycle-paths or car-sharing, should also be covered. With these aims in view, all forms of mobility which are not damaging to the environment should be coordinated and assisted as part of an environmental alliance. 1. 7. The Communication therefore rightly highlights the importance of interlinking the various means of transport which are on offer. Effective mobility management should be linked to consultations on mobility; parties such as user-groups and the social partners, should be involved in decision-making here. 1. 8. Too little attention is, however, paid in the Com- mission’s communication to the possibilities as regards urban planning (1), opened up by the organization of transport, and the complex nature of this issue. The same criticism could be levelled as regards spatial planning: mobility and equal opportunities for people living in rural areas should be improved by promoting local public transport, rather than by relying exclusively on private cars. (1) See the communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on sustainable urban development in the European Union: a framework for action. C 138/8 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 18. 5. 1999 1. 9. The provision of an adequate measure of local public transport is a public service requirement. In the case of local public transport, the goal of promoting competition — which is broadly endorsed — must continue to be subordinated to the prime objective of providing essential public services. The Committee would point out that, under the 1. 10. subsidiarity principle, the right of local authorities themselves to provide such essential public services in the transport sector must not be restricted by EU provisions. including, 1. 11. In cases where exclusive rights in respect of local public passenger transport are allocated on the basis of tenders, the local authorities should — with due regard to the planned liberalization drive — be entitled to apply criteria to the tender procedure which are in line with local needs and which may, perhaps, also include acceptance of particular tasks or commitments, in particular, transport policy, environmental, economic and social considerations and a responsible employment policy. The intention here is to prevent competition for transport services being based solely on the cost factor, which would also have a detrimental effect on the integration of transport supply. It must also be possible for quality standards to be included amongst the criteria for awarding contracts. In cases where transport services provided by private operators take the form of essential public services, it must, however, also be possible to set conditions relating to the social obligations of operators. Public and private transport undertakings should be placed on an equal footing for the purposes of the provisions governing essential public services and the granting of exclusive rights. 2. Specific comments 2. 1. Introduction In its communication the Commission underlines 2. 1. 1. the importance of transport as a means of achieving the goal of sustainable development. The Committee also expressly endorses the description in Agenda 2000 of the importance of good, sustainable local and regional passenger transport — particularly also with a view to avoiding social discrimination and promoting the quality of life in rural areas. The Committee endorses the views expressed in the 2. 1. 2. communication concerning practical methods for organizing transport systems in a more sustainable way and for reducing excessive dependence on private cars. The Committee draws attention, in particular, to the fact that the creation of a ‘door-to-door’ transport system for the public represents a major challenge. Towns, cities and regions have a particularly important role to play in the establishment of such a network. 2. 1. 3. If we are to take up and put to good effect the ‘Challenges and opportunities for change’, the Committee would once again propose — as it did in its Opinion on the the Commission Citizens’ Network Green Paper — that organize a series of events throughout the EU on the subject of the Citizens’ Network. These events which should be underpinned by the Commission’s administrative and financial resources should focus in particular on improving the situation in rural areas and promoting the interests of people with reduced mobility. The reference to centrally-organized events on the Citizens’ Network falls short of what is required. The Commission should pay special attention to the 2. 1. 4. integration of transport services. With this aim in view, the establishment of transport associations, providing coordinated services and user-friendly and clear prices and operating systems should be promoted by following best practice. 3. The work programme 3. 1. Stimulating information exchange The Committee supports the promotion of infor- 3. 1. 1. mation exchange; this provides an important basis for the further development of local and regional transport. The demonstrable demand for such information clearly indicates the need for action to be taken in this field as a matter of urgency. 3. 1. 2. The Committee welcomes the establishment of the European Local Transport Information Service (ELTIS), set up with the help of the POLIS network of cities and regions and the International Union of Public Transport (UITP). The Committee supports the Commission’s intention to include in this service more information on other public transport possibilities, such as cycling and car-sharing, in addition to information on public local and regional passenger transport. Round-table discussions and international specialist 3. 1. 3. conferences are, in the Committee’s view, good back-up measures for helping to achieve the objectives being pursued. The Committee welcomes the further development of net- works for exchanging information on EU policy and pro- grammes. Attention should be paid in this context to the particular problems facing regions situated at the periphery of the EU, such as the Mediterranean region. 3. 1. 4. The Committee welcomes the special attention paid by the Commission to the situation in the CEEC and the Baltic states. It is particularly necessary for these countries to be included in the information-exchange arrangements in view of the fact that the promotion of local public transport and the linking of these countries into regional and long-distance transport services is of key importance to their development. In this context the specific problems facing these states and the need to stipulate adequate transitional periods should be taken into account. The European cycling associations provide an exam- 3. 1. 5. ple of a field in which progress has been made in bringing together key actors. 18. 5. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 138/9 3. 2. Benchmarking to improve transport systems The Committee regards EU-wide benchmarking as 3. 2. 1. an interesting tool for comparing the performance of local transport systems in given areas with good practice elsewhere. This instrument will therefore provide important help to the authorities and transport undertakings responsible for providing local and regional passenger transport when they have to take decisions. Special consideration should be given in this respect to qualitative aspects of the provision of services, the networking of transport supplies (door-to-door service) and complementary services (cycle-hire, etc. ). The Committee therefore eagerly awaits the results of a pilot benchmarking project for local transport systems being conducted jointly by the Commission and the Council of European Municipalities and Regions (CEMR). The Committee emphatically shares 3. 2. 2. the Com- mission’s view that external factors, such as land-use planning and traffic management, need to be taken into account when assessing the performance of transport operators. 3. 2. 3. The Committee keenly awaits the presentation of the self-assessment system announced by the Commission and the quality criteria produced by the QUATTRO research projects. The Committee points out in this context that account has to be taken, also in accordance with Article 117 of the EC Treaty, of considerations relating to working conditions when providing services. Such aspects may include, for example, measures to ensure that staff are fit to drive and measures to improve the professional skills of drivers. 3. 2. 4. The European Committee of Standardization (CEN) can make a valuable contribution to the establishment of the quality criteria for standard definitions in respect of passenger transport. The Committee welcomes 3. 2. 5. the Commission’s announcement that it is to make available a handbook on benchmarking public transport and other information. It does, however, point out that such information is intended to help local authorities and transport operators responsible for providing transport. These instruments should therefore be made available to these parties. As it already pointed out in its Opinion on the Green Paper on the Citizens’ Network (1), the Committee regards the awarding of quality labels and/or prizes as a measure which will provide a real stimulus for quality-based competition. 3. 2. 6. Under the Commission’s benchmarking project, the marketing aspect should be further developed with a view to tabling special marketing recommendations designed to stimulate demand. 3. 3. Establishing the right policy framework 3. 3. 1. The Committee welcomes the Commission’s inten- tion to review how to encourage the adoption of good practice in transport aspects of land-use planning. 3. 3. 2. An increasing number of employers and under- takings are formulating plans for encouraging their staff and visitors to adopt sustainable patterns of transport behaviour. The Committee welcomes this development which is, however, only at an initial stage. 3. 3. 3. One way of promoting this development would be to involve the social partners and user-groups more closely in the planning of the supply of local transport. The Committee advocates the organization of a regional social dialogue on integrated local transport policy at both local and regional levels; such a dialogue should involve not only transport undertakings, business associations, trade unions, environmen- tal and transport-user associations but also individual passen- ger and car-drivers. 3. 3. 4. The Committee attaches considerable importance in particular to active mobility management as a means of resolving transport problems. With this aim in view, local means of transport should be linked; steps should also be taken to integrate these means of transport, inter alia in a way in which is readily recognizable to the public. This task would be particularly facilitated if members of the public had to deal with only one body (or a small number of bodies) (single management body). In this context mobility management should be extended to include mobility consultation. 3. 3. 5. F a i r a n d e f f i c i e n t t r a n s p o r t p r i c i n g 3. 3. 5. 1. In many EU Member States the current price structure for the various means of transport encourages people to use cars. One reason for this is that car-users in these States are not billed for external costs. 3. 3. 5. 2. The Green Paper on Fair and Efficient Pricing in Transport (2) addresses the subject of internalizing the external costs of transport; the Committee generally endorses this concept. 3. 3. 5. 3. The Committee does, however, regard the general introduction of road pricing in urban areas as problematic because of (a) the high level of local opposition to this idea, (b) the attendant administrative costs, and (c) the danger that traffic will be transferred away from central urban areas to outside areas, thereby jeopardizing the viability of inner-city areas. Rather than levying charges on traffic flows into urban areas, the levying of charges on stationary traffic (management of parking areas) should be extended; Park and Ride schemes could also be introduced in this context. The research projects currently being carried out in this connection are expected to provide valuable indications for further debate. 3. 3. 6. T r a n s p o r t t e l e m a t i c s telematics. The Committee shares the view that transport 3. 3. 6. 1. services can be made more efficient and quality can be increased by using transport is, however, important that such measures are not used solely to optimize the management of private transport but are rather a network information concerning public of other information, e. g. transport routes and timetables. Greater use should also be made of telematics in regional and local public transport. Otherwise there is a risk that telematics will be used primarily as an instrument for promoting private transport. It (1) OJ C 212, 22. 7. 1996, p. 77. (2) OJ C 56, 24. 2. 1997, p. 31. C 138/10 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 18. 5. 1999 3. 3. 6. 2. The development of electronic payment and ticket- ing systems may also help to improve the accessibility of public transport systems and thereby promote ‘modal- splits’ (1). 3. 3. 6. 3. The Committee attaches particular importance to the use of telematics in the field of traffic control involving priority for public transport vehicles at traffic lights. Such measures not only help to speed up the flow of public transport vehicles, thereby making it more attractive for the public to use these services, but also facilitate the more effective use of resources in public passenger transport; such services can therefore be provided more cheaply and offered at lower prices. The Committee welcomes measures to establish 3. 3. 6. 4. compatibility between the various systems and to establish networks of telematics applications with a view to furthering the goal of providing trans-European services. 3. 3. 7. V e h i c l e a n d e n v i r o n m e n t a l s t a n d a r d s 3. 3. 7. 1. The Committee welcomes the proposal to intro- duce standards in respect of the use of buses in urban transport. These standards also cover sustainability and accessibility. The Committee supports the Commission proposals for tighter emission standards for vehicles, improved quality standards for fuels and stricter rules on inspection and maintenance checks (2). 3. 3. 8. P u b l i c l o c a l p o r t s e r v i c e s a n d a n d r e g i o n a l p a s s e n g e r c o m p e t i t i o n i n t r a n s - 3. 3. 8. 1. Public transport has an important role to play in reducing pollution and promoting economic growth and social cohesion. The viability of towns and cities is in jeopardy if they do not have effective public transport facilities. The transport supply must therefore be greater than the supply provided by operators on purely commercial grounds. Public service transport also needs to be provided. 3. 3. 8. 2. The Committee attaches considerable importance in this context to the contribution made by local and regional transport to promoting integration. Most Member States provide for the possibility of awarding exclusive rights to operate particular forms of transport in specified geographical areas; this provision may help to promote such services. The Commission recognizes that the benefits of such exclusive rights — also with regard to promoting investment by operators — outweigh the possible drawbacks as regards competition law. (1) OJ C 66, 3. 3. 1997, p. 23. (2) Auto/Oil Programme (COM(96) 248 final). 3. 3. 8. 3. The Commission also deplores the fact that when exclusive rights or public service contracts are being awarded there is no obligation to take account of market forces. Attention is drawn in this context to the results of the ISOTOPE study which pointed to the fact that cost savings of between 10 and 35 % could be achieved through the use of tendering procedures. 3. 3. 8. 4. The Committee draws attention to the lack of observations on the impact of such tendering procedures on the drive to achieve integration, particularly with regard to traffic planning and coordination with other transport modes. In this context there are indications that some negative consequences may also occur. The examples quoted in the ISOTOPE study also clearly demonstrate that local authorities already pay due regard to cost considerations when organizing transport networks. The Commission’s comment that freedom of establishment has led to ‘cross-border initiatives’ and is now bound to lead to the development of a common market is not accurate (see point 2. 3. 6 of the Commission’s Communication). A more likely outcome — which has already occurred in some states — is a trend towards the establishment of oligopolies which restrict competition. The Committee would prefer to see local public transport systems controlled at local and regional level and backed up by corresponding SME-type business structures established under public or private law. The Committee endorses the Commission’s intention to insist that provision be made for reasonable transitional periods for previous operators when new rules are introduced. The Committee expressly supports and attaches considerable importance to the Commission’s endeavours to prevent the establishment of oligopolies. 3. 3. 8. 5. The Committee already drew attention in its Opin- ion on the Citizens’ Network Green Paper to the fact that competition on grounds of quality and performance is prefer- able to competition based solely on price. When assessing the suitability of instruments consideration should also be given to factors such as trends in passenger revenue, the impact on moves towards integrating networks and the quality of services, also with regard to social and physical accessibility. 3. 3. 8. 6. National laws now give local and regional auth- orities in many states the opportunity to decide how public service transport is to be provided at local level. The Committee draws attention to the fact that in its communication the Commission fails to explain how EU initiatives on the establishment of a legal framework for regional and local transport are to be squared with the above-mentioned right, thereby respecting the principle of subsidiarity. 3. 3. 8. 7. Transparent procedures should, in the Committee’s view, be adopted in cases where public transport services are put out to tender. It would however stress that it must be possible for the competent local and regional authorities to apply criteria other than purely economic criteria to the tendering procedure. Other criteria which come into question here are, for example, social criteria or considerations relating to the quality and reliability of the service or the guaranteed maintenance of transport infrastructure. 18. 5. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 138/11 3. 3. 9. W o m e n ’ s t r a n s p o r t n e e d s 3. 4. 2. R e s e a r c h , t e c h n o l o g i c a l d e v e l o p m e n t a n d d e m o n s t r a t i o n p r o j e c t s 3. 3. 9. 1. Women have special transport and safety needs, for example with regard to the accessibility of public transport systems; these needs must be taken into account. An adequate supply of local public transport services needs to be provided for both women and men — particularly those travelling with children — and not just in the rush hour and other peak travel periods. The specific requirements of elderly infirm people, disabled people, children and young people should, however, also not be forgotten. The Committee endorses the projects listed by the Commission which are of particular relevance to the Citizens’ Network, namely: ‘Sustainable mobility and intermobility’, ‘Land trans- ‘The city of tomorrow and port and marine technologies’, cultural heritage’ and ‘Systems and services for the citizen’. The measures currently being taken to translate these projects into action should, in the Committee’s view, be carried forward without delay. 3. 3. 10. P e o p l e w i t h r e d u c e d m o b i l i t y The availability of effective local and regional public transport systems is particularly necessary for people with reduced mobility. In the light of the needs of this group of transport- users minimum standards should be introduced in respect of the way in which infrastructure is organized (motor vehicles, bus stops, etc. ). The Committee also welcomes the measures announced by the Commission for facilitating travel by people with reduced mobility. 3. 4. Using the European Union’s financial instruments effectively Local and regional authorities are responsible for investment in local and regional transport networks. With a view to achieving the EU’s objectives in respect of effective links between trans-European long-distance transport networks and local and regional transport networks, the EU should help to optimize the effectiveness of local and regional transport networks. The Commission should instigate a special investment pro- gramme for the joint financing of interconnections with a view to promoting intermodality and links with the trans-European transport network (TEN-T). This programme would also boost short- and medium-term employment policy since the projects have already been prepared by local transport enterprises and they could be implemented rapidly. 3. 4. 1. T h e t r a n s - E u r o p e a n t r a n s p o r t n e t - w o r k 3. 4. 3. R e g i o n a l d e v e l o p m e n t a n d t h e S t r u c - t u r a l F u n d s The Committee endorses the revision of the eligibility criteria and evaluation systems for the Structural Funds being planned by the Commission as part of Agenda 2000. The establishment and further development of local public transport infrastructure in rural areas should be covered by the financing funds (stopping areas, interchanges, control centres, vehicles). 3. 4. 4. I n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t E U f u n d i n g Sustainable local and regional passenger transport helps pro- mote the objectives of a number of EU programmes. These programmes include the trans-European transport network, the Structural Funds, R and TD programmes in the fields of transport policy, telematics applications and energy, Phare, Tacis, Ispra, LIFE, SAVE and the loan programmes of the European Investment Bank. transport means, The Committee supports the Commission’s intention to issue a guide explaining how the abovementioned programmes can promote local and regional transport. The guide should also outline the key criteria and procedures for awarding financial aid under the respective programmes. 4. Final observation The Committee highlights the importance of the trans- European transport network (TEN-T) and encourages the Commission to revise the guidelines in this respect with a view to stimulating participation by territorial authorities and transport undertakings and providing for joint financing by the Commission, as called for in point 3. 4 above. 4. 1. The Committee would reiterate its proposal that com- petition and market regulation issues be addressed in a separate green paper which would deal in detail with the abovementioned links. C 138/12 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 18. 5. 1999 The 1998 NEA Opinion and the hearing organized by the Commission in Brussels on 29 June 1998 did not provide an adequate basis as a number of key questions were not properly resolved; these include: is absolute priority to be given to the subsidiarity principle; is local public transport to be included in the internal market (Article 3(c) of the EC Treaty); is local public transport to be covered by the EC Treaty articles governing transport policy (Articles 74 et seq. ); what account has to be taken of Articles 90 (public undertakings) and 92 (state aid) of the EC Treaty. It 4. 2. is suggested that a qualitative and quantitative monitoring system be set up for the political implementation of the work programme. Brussels, 24 March 1999. The President of the Economic and Social Committee Beatrice RANGONI MACHIAVELLI Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Council Directive on port reception facilities for ship-generated waste and cargo residues’ (1) (1999/C 138/04) On 31 July 1998 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under Article 84(2) of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned proposal. The Section for Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society, which was responsible for preparing the Committee’s work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 9 March 1999. The rapporteur was Mr Chagas. At its 362nd plenary session (meeting of 24 March 1999), the Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion with 91 votes in favour and three abstentions. 1. Introduction The Marpol Convention, which was adopted by the 1. 1. International Maritime Organization (IMO) in 1973 and supplemented by Protocols in 1978 and 1997, was the first international convention to establish guidelines for preventing pollution caused by ships. It has been amended on a number of occasions with a view to updating and strengthening its provisions. 1. 2. Marpol 73/78 contains a set of rules and provisions for preventing pollution of the marine environment by oil (Annex I); for the control of pollution by noxious liquid substances carried in bulk (Annex II); for preventing pollution by harmful substances carried in packaged form or in con- tainers or tanks (Annex III); for preventing pollution by sewage (Annex IV) and garbage (Annex V); and for the prevention of air pollution by ships (Annex VI) (2). 1. 3. Marpol 73/78 was the first instrument to oblige all ships — rather than just oil tankers — to be fitted with segregated oil tanks. It also introduced the concept of ‘special areas’. These areas are considered so vulnerable that oil (1) OJ C 271, 31. 8. 1998, p. 79. (2) Annexes IV and VI have not yet entered into force. discharges are completely prohibited. The main special areas are the Mediterranean Sea, the Baltic Sea, the Black Sea, the Red Sea and the Antarctic. 1. 4. Marpol 73/78 requires the contracting parties to ensure the provision of adequate port facilities for reception of the various types of substance classified in the five annexes and, in particular, discharges of oil (Annex I), noxious liquid sub- stances (Annex II) and garbage (Annex V). 1. 5. The convention seeks to strike a balance between the need to protect the marine environment and the wish not to impose obligations which would make shipping activities unduly costly. 1. 6. Marpol 73/78 also seeks to strike an environmental balance between the interests of the flag states and those of the maritime states in which the ships operate, by establishing rights and obligations for all these states and laying down operational requirements for ships. Flag states have tradition- ally claimed sole jurisdiction over their vessels, while maritime states feel that they should be granted the authority to ensure that the convention is respected by all vessels which operate along their coasts