Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the 'Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions - The Common Transport Policy: Sustainable Mobility: Perspectives for the Future'
C 374/76 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 23. 12. 1999 Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the ‘Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — The Common Transport Policy: Sustainable Mobility: Perspectives for the Future’ (1999/C 374/17) THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS, having regard to Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — The Common Transport Policy: Sustainable Mobility: Perspectives for the Future (COM(1998) 716 final); having regard to the decision taken by the Commission on 10 December 1998, under the first paragraph of Article 198c of the Treaty establishing the European Community, to consult the Committee of the Regions on the matter; having regard to the decision of its Bureau on 10 March 1998 to direct Commission 3 (Trans-European Networks, Transport and Information Society) to draw up the relevant opinion; having regard to its earlier opinions on: — ‘Sea Ports and Maritime Infrastructure’ (CdR 331/98 fin) (1), — ‘New Regulatory Framework for conditions of access to railway infrastructure’ (CdR 58/99 rev 1), — ‘The Common Transport Policy Action Programme 1995-2000’ (CdR 406/95 fin) (2), — ‘A sustainable transport strategy’ (CdR 255/97 fin) (3), ‘Developing the Citizen’s Network — why good local and regional passenger transport is important and how the European Commission is helping to bring it about’ (CdR 436/98 fin) (4), — ‘The White Paper on — Fair Payment for infrastructure charging framework in the EU’ (CdR 408/98 fin) (5), — ‘Transport and CO2 — Developing a Community Approach’ (CdR 230/98 fin) (6); having regard to the draft opinion [CdR 189/99 rev. 1) adopted by Commission 3 on 15 July 1999 (rapporteur: Mrs Coffey (IRL, EA)], adopted the following opinion unanimously at its 30th plenary session on 15 and 16 September 1999 (meeting of 16 September). 1. Introduction 1. 1. The communication from the Commission serves as an overview of the current trends and policy directions within the Common Transport Policy (CTP). Looking at all of the programmes within the framework, the Commission’s Communication looks to the future of the CTP and what directions it should take to lead on from. Many developments (1) OJ C 93, 6. 4. 1999, p. 20. (2) OJ C 337, 11. 11. 1996, p. 13. (3) OJ C 180, 11. 6. 1998, p. 1. (4) OJ C 198, 14. 7. 1999, p. 8. (5) OJ C 198, 14. 7. 1999, p. 16. (6) OJ C 198, 14. 7. 1999, p. 3. have taken place since the publication of the Commission’s Common Transport Policy action programme for 1995- 2000 (7) and the objectives of this programme remain valid for the purpose of this framework. 1. 1. 1. The Committee of the Regions (COR) has followed the recent developments of the Common Transport Policy from the Action Programme 1995-2000 through opinions on the measures proposed on the basis of it. This opinion will examine the current communication and its proposals for future action in light of the COR’s previous opinions. (7) COM(95) 302 final. 23. 12. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 374/77 1. 2. Objectives of the Common Transport Policy Improving quality and the effectiveness of the exter- 1. 2. 1. nal dimension of the Common Transport Policy are central objectives of the Commission’s Communication and these aspects must be considered in order to ensure a sustainable transport strategy is pursued in all areas. 1. 2. 2. Currently there are five major objectives in terms of improving efficiency and competitiveness for the future development of the CTP. Their overall aim is to ensure the full potential of European transport systems and promote the competitiveness of European business which will maximise growth, employment, and environmental sustainability. 2. 2. 3. The rail transport sector faces issues on several fronts which the Commission’s communication goes some way towards addressing. Market share has dropped steadily against other modes and in terms of sustainability at least, the need to prioritise rail transport cannot be overemphasised. Rail transport can compete very favourably with other modes in terms of environmental impact when a pricing regime which incorporates the principles of polluter pays and internalisation of external costs is established. The COR welcomes the series of proposals by the Commission but acknowledges that movement is required by all the actors in this sector to make rail more competitive. — Liberalising market access 2. 3. Ports — Ensuring integrated transport systems across Europe — Ensuring fair and efficient pricing within and between transport modes — Enhancing the social dimension — Making sure rules which have been agreed are properly implemented. 2. Market Access and Functioning The two main priorities for the Commission with 2. 1. regard to market access and functioning are the rail sector and ports. 2. 2. Rail 2. 2. 1. Further to the Commission’s White Paper on the revitalisation of the Community’s Railways, steps are being taken on charging, capacity allocation, separation of infrastruc- ture management and operation, and licensing. There will be proposals on public service contracts and on State aids for land transport and also a communication for the integration of national systems including technical interoperability. 2. 2. 2. The COR opinion on the package of measures on railways welcomes the measures proposed by the Commission. However, the Commission should seriously consider the different recommendations proposed by the COR which are essential in order to ensure that restructuring of the rail sector brings benefits to all the affected regions in Europe. For example, in regard to pricing policy, the infrastructure manager should be able to apply prices based on commercial decisions and not solely on rigid and predetermined criteria. The proposals in the directive could pose problems for infrastruc- ture managers, who can be local/regional authorities, if they do not have powers to take corrective measures to remedy any malfunctioning of the system. 2. 3. 1. The liberalisation of port services will be dealt with by forthcoming Commission proposal following consultation on its Green Paper on Sea Ports and Maritime Infrastructure. The COR proposed several recommendations in its opinion on the Green Paper in terms of competitiveness. Its conclusions re-emphasised the need for uniform laws on protection of the environment, workplace safety and conditions, external security and border controls to ensure fair conditions for competition. These rules and the pricing structure for the use of port facilities should take account, however, of natural (geographical etc. ) and human (management/organisational) differences in ports. To ensure free and fair competition in the port sector also guidelines on state aid are required. As the ports and maritime infrastructure of the EU is 2. 3. 2. essential to the economic and social well-being of particular regions in the Union, the COR emphasises the need to adhere to the principle of subsidiarity. When decisions concerning the establishment of port facilities are being considered, local and regional authorities are most aware of what action needs to be taken. Therefore the Committee of the Regions would empha- sise the importance of final decisions concerning ports and maritime infrastructure being taken by local and regional public and private parties. 3. Integrated Transport Systems The integration of the Community’s transport systems 3. 1. has long been a priority for the Commission and this Communication reaffirms this pledge. The implementation of priority TENS projects defined at the Essen summit will be encouraged by the Commission and new guidelines for the TEN-T will be published. The Commission further recognises the importance of extending the Trans-European Networks into applicant countries. Combined transport and intermo- dality will be promoted through the implementation of the Action Plan for global navigation by satellite. Transport telematics will assist intermodality and thus the efficiency of different transport modes. C 374/78 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 23. 12. 1999 3. 2. The COR welcomes the attention given to the TENS by the Commission in its proposed future work programme. The emphasis on intelligent systems and telematics which will increase the effectiveness of existing infrastructure rather than solely concentrating on the construction of more infrastructure is a trend to be encouraged. The launch by the Council of a strategy for the promotion of innovation in transport and a debate on the development of a global satellite navigation system (Galileo) and transport telematics is a further step along this path. The applications of such systems could include rail signalling, maritime navigation, air traffic and even road traffic control. Although new rules for combined transport have been 3. 3. drawn up by the Commission to encourage intermodality, the COR feel that the use of such technology could have far greater benefits. Combined transport has a limited market and greater emphasis on intelligent transport systems could bring about more significant intermodal shifts than the means used to promote combined transport with far reaching benefits in terms of safety and the environment. 3. 4. As the COR opinion on a sustainable transport strat- egy (1) pointed out, transport networks should be integrated within regions across the different modes, between regional, national and international systems and between the European TEN-T and the transport networks of candidate countries. 3. 5. Linking the TENS into local and regional passenger transport networks is an essential principle which should be framework in consideration of included in any transport Europe’s citizens. In its opinion on the financial rules for the Trans-European networks (2), the COR highlighted the problem of ‘missing links’. These occur where trans-European traffic meets regional traffic and serious congestion occurs thus defeating the flow and purpose of the TENS. Specific subsidies are required for the funding of projects which will improve local commuter transport infrastructure such as bus corridors, light rail etc. It is hoped that infrastructure charging will encourage intermodal shifts and relieve the pressure on local and regional transport thus freeing the way for TENS traffic. 3. 6. The COR opinion on the regulations laying down general rules on the granting of Community financial aid in the field of trans-European networks outlines several points which were overlooked in the Council regulation. These points include the introduction of a larger budget allocation, the administrative procedures, simplification of increased funding for studies, a cost-efficiency evaluation of small projects, give local and regional authorities a greater role and a greater emphasis on PPPs. The Committee believes that these points should be included in the revision of the guidelines proposed for the period 2000-2004. 4. Fair and Efficient Pricing the Committee of for Infrastructure Use (3), Following the Commission’s White Paper on Fair 4. 1. the Payment Regions endorsed the Commission’s principles on charging on the basis of the marginal social cost principle. The White Paper’s aim is to encourage intermodality and more efficient use of transport infrastructure. The polluter pays principle and point of use charging are also to be incorporated into charges and levies. With regard to the principle of sustainability, greater emphasis should be placed on the provision of incentives for clean technologies and the design of charging systems should be so that low emission vehicles and multiple- occupancy of private vehicles etc. be encouraged. 4. 2. The COR however would wish that in the next period (phase two 2001-2004) that the Commission will incorporate the proposals made by the COR which include addressing user behaviour not only by direct taxes or charges but also address the problem of tax incentive schemes which serve to encourage car use. Furthermore, the COR recommends that the establish- ment of an EU transport strategy includes the private car, an efficient global approach to transport costs should not separately assess public transport and the use of private car. Flexibility in the application of charges is a necessity for several reasons and the COR reaffirms that modal shifts and changes in user behaviour will only occur when there is a viable alternative available which applies both for commercial and private users. As a first step the COR would urge the Commission to carry out a study on teleworking to examine its feasibility and possible social, economic and environmental benefits. 4. 3. It is essential that in the decision-making process for the structure of charges and taxes that local and regional authorities are fully consulted and appropriately represented on the committee of experts on charging for the use of infrastructure. The needs of particular regions must be given due attention and flexibility applied in order that problems such as inaccessibility and remoteness are not exacerbated. Furthermore as the local and regional authorities will be implementing a great deal of the principles and also tackling the problems, they should have an input as to how revenue from charges and taxes is spent. (1) CdR 255/97 fin — OJ C 180, 11. 6. 1998, p. 1. (2) CdR 217/98 fin — OJ C 93, 6. 4. 1999, p. 29. (3) COM(1998) 466 final. 23. 12. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 374/79 5. Economic and Social Cohesion 5. 1. Economic and Social cohesion is a priority for the Commission and this was comprehensively dealt with in a communication on transport and cohesion (1). This paper outlines the role of the CTP in reducing regional and social disparities in the EU alongside instruments such as the Structural and Cohesion funds. An improved transport system can make a less developed region attractive for investment as well as contributing to the overall strength of the region for economic development. The COR particular welcomes to the attention given to sustainability and the promotion of accessibility in the Commission’s communication. Accessible and affordable public transport serves a social, economic and environmental purpose and as such must continue to receive state aid, complying with EU State aid regulations. 5. 2. The Commission is continually looking into how competition in public transport can be opened up while maintaining access for all. On the basis of a Commission study of public service rules and practices in land transport, the need to improve transparency and efficiency of public transport for the benefit of disadvantaged regions and social groups has been recognised. More power and responsibilities needs to be devolved to local and regional authorities to enable them to develop their own transport systems as they see fit. This requires them having the necessary financial resources to take action which should, where possible, be available to them through the collection of local taxes. The Commission is continually trying to balance 5. 3. competitiveness with working conditions and with proposals on working time. Following the Working Time Directive, the Commission has gradually dealt with the ‘excluded sectors’ which included transport workers. Full agreement has not been reached on all aspects of transport workers’ working conditions and this should be pursued as a matter of urgency in order to resolve the difficulties and balance the priorities of fair conditions of competition and social protection in a sensitive way. 6. Making sure the rules are applied 6. 1. The transposition and correct implementation of com- petition rules adopted by Member States is essential for the good functioning of the transport internal market and the Commission is resolute in its efforts to ensure compliance. The Committee of the Regions supports the Commission in its aim which will ensure fairness for all. It is proposed by the COR that in the continued clarification and revision of legislation that the specific needs of Europe’s local and regional authorities will be considered. Furthermore the COR would wish to be represented on any bodies established to exercise regulatory authority in the transport sector. For example the Aviation Safety Authority will have an advisory panel of experts and the COR would wish to be represented on this or other regulatory authorities. 7. Improving Quality 7. 1. The Commission’s communication dedicates an entire section to the safety and environmental dimensions of the European Transport Policy. The EU has a significant role to play in providing a high level of safety for both consumers and transport workers. The COR endorses the package of measures currently underway and those proposed for 2000- 2004. 7. 2. Safety 7. 2. 1. Safety for both consumers and workers is a key priority for the Commission in a market where volumes are constantly increasing and congestion is growing. Proposals have been made in civil aviation (2), ro/ro passenger ferries (3) and road transport through the car testing programme EURO- NCAP. In the COR’s opinion (4) regarding air transport safety, the point was made that smaller airports have different needs to larger ones and this should be considered when European rules are being laid down. Safety is a major consideration which is not 7. 2. 2. adequately dealt with by this Commission Communication. The COR Opinion on the Common Transport Policy Action Programme 1995-2000 addressed the need for a review of speed limits, measures to enforce traffic regulations and prosecution of infringements. Limitations over the right to drive could be introduced such as age/engine size consider- ation. The COR in their opinion called for a survey of the impact of safety measures in all Member States and awaits with interest the Commission’s communication on road safety action priorities. Furthermore, the COR proposed a new ‘zero defect’ strategy as in industrial quality control which would link transport safety activities with state health systems and would like to see some movement on this. (1) COM(1998) 806 final. (2) COM(1997) 55 final; COM(1997) 382 final. (3) COM(98)71 final. (4) CdR 406/95 fin — OJ C 337, 11. 11. 1996, p. 13. C 374/80 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 23. 12. 1999 7. 3. Environment 7. 3. 1. The EU is obliged under Article 3c of the Amsterdam Treaty to integrate environmental protection requirements into the definition and implementation of Community policies with a view to promoting sustainable development. Further- more, the strategy of integrating environmental considerations into EU policies will be vigorously pursued. Among the areas being dealt with under the environmental portfolio are, air transportation noise and pollution, ship generated waste and cargo residues, problems caused by heavy goods vehicles and emission standards in the context of the Auto/Oil II programme. The Commission also envisages the development of new initiatives not dealt with in the Council’s work programme and strategy. 7. 3. 2. In its Opinion on the Common Transport Policy 1995-2000 the COR called for special measures to supplement the Action Programme for the protection of ecologically sensitive regions and areas affected by the European transport system. These included building regulations, integrated sol- utions for the traffic infrastructure network and even the complete restriction of choice over modes of transport in exceptional cases where alternatives modes are available. Furthermore, the COR wish to encourage research into the production of vehicles with low CO2 and other emissions as well as research into the area of renewable fuels. The most effective and sustainable solution to reduc- 7. 3. 3. ing the growth in emissions is to restrict the demand to travel. Spatial planning is central to this aim and can help reduce journey distances, along with complementary measures resulting in emission reductions by about one third by 2010. Although the Community does not have competence in the area of spatial planning, this is an area where the Commission could propose ‘soft’ policies which could have a significantly positive effect for the environment and sustainable develop- ment. Although an examination of the role of the CTP in the European Spatial Development Perspective is welcomed, it falls far short of the measures proposed by the COR which could result in a significant halt to growth in CO2 emissions. 7. 3. 4. As road and air transport produces the most CO2 per passenger per kilometre, these should be tackled as a matter of priority. The transport of freight by road and air is also problematic for similar reasons. In its opinion on Trans- port and CO2, the COR proposed a series of taxes on fuels for private transport and a realignment on taxes for kerosene for air transport. However, the COR recognises that a flexible approach should be taken with regard to road and air transport in peripheral areas due to their efficiencies. Although the Commission’s proposals to introduce infrastructure charges should encourage intermodal shifts for the more efficient use of infrastructure, such fiscal policies must be combined with structural changes to infrastructure use such as land-use planning policies. 7. 4. Public Passenger Transport 7. 4. 1. Specific consumer protection measures are intended in order to enhance consumer confidence. The action pro- gramme on local public transport, which is the only form of transport available to all citizens, will cover areas such as best practice, integrated passenger services and benchmarking. Under the fifth framework programme for research and development, a series of targeted research actions have been proposed to improve the efficiency and sustain- ability and enhance the safety and intermodality of the transport system. intermodal 7. 4. 2. Research activities carried out under the fifth Frame- work Programme for Research and Development should involve the participation of local and regional authorities. They are the ideal partners in the execution of research programmes as they function at to the citizen and the level closest understand local needs best. Furthermore, several of the actions proposed in the fifth framework are of particular relevance to local passenger transport, for example ‘Sustainable Mobility and Intermodality’, ‘Systems and Services for the Citizen’ etc. 7. 4. 3. A greater emphasis on the liberalisation of public transport is necessary in order to ensure a high standard of service for the public for less outlay by the public exchequer. Competitive tendering in the transport market can help reduce the requirement for public subsidy. Franchised local bus services, whereby operators bid competitively on routes deter- mined by the local or regional authority is one example. The relevant authority determines the quality of service and offers contracts only on the conditions set out. The awarding of transport contracts will free resources which can be used to fund better public transport and make public transport more efficient. Furthermore, privatisation and the involvement of public private partnerships will ensure greater quality of service which will be to the benefit of consumers. This should be a priority in the Commission’s programme 2000-2004. 7. 4. 4. In terms of the overall strategy that should be applied in the view of the COR, linking into local passenger transport networks is essential. In its Opinion on Developing the Citizen’s Network (1), the Committee of the Regions highlights (1) CdR 436/98 fin — OJ C 198, 14. 7. 1999, p. 8. 23. 12. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 374/81 the importance of local and regional authorities in public passenger transport. It emphasised: 9. Recommendations — the importance of a well-functioning local and regional transport network to the proper functioning of a national and European transport system; — the economic, environmental and social value of an efficient transport system; — the necessity of flexibility allowing for the creation of an integrated and intermodal system; — that a properly functioning citizen’s network is central to sustainable urban development. 8. Improving External Effectiveness The Community is anxious to be effective in the 8. 1. enlargement process and ensure the smooth integration of the accession countries into the EU. The experience of the creation of the internal market is helpful in the large task ahead of identifying and adapting legislation. Already negotiations are underway with third countries in the areas of civil aviation, HGVs, coach services and inland waterways. In the longer term, the Community will constantly review the operation of the transport market and to do this the European Transport Data System will monitor the impact of transport on regional development, the environment and safety. 8. 2. In time, the regulatory framework will need to be revised, especially to deal with changes to the State Aid guidelines and the COR recommend greater simplification of these regulations. The current structure can be cumbersome in terms of administration and simplicity will ensure greater efficiency and transparency. The TEN-T will need to be further revised in line with enlargement developments and the financial regulations must consider the specific needs of applicant countries. In fact all the above areas will need to be reassessed in light of enlargement. Furthermore, EU enlarge- ment and development of transport networks within and between new Member States must not compromise environ- mentally sensitive areas of applicant countries. If general policies cannot guarantee the highest levels of environmental protection, the Commission should consider an ecopoint system similar to the current Alpine regime. 9. 1. The COR wish to make the following proposals in addition to the remarks made in connection with the Commission’s communication. The following are supplemen- tary recommendations to issues which the COR wish to be considered in the framing of future common transport policy which are not addressed in the communication. 9. 2. In line with the call made in the COR opinion on a sustainable transport policy for local and regional authorities, The COR re-emphasise the need for local and regional authorities to be involved in all stages of the development of a European Transport Policy. As local and regional authorities are regularly called upon to co-finance transport projects, there should be close involvement in policy formation to ensure that local needs are considered and integrated. the recommendations of 9. 3. Although the Community does not have competence in the area of spatial planning, the Commission should ensure that the COR opinion on the European Spatial Development Perspective are considered in future policy development. As the COR opinion on a sustain- able transport strategy pointed out an improved transport system, as part of a programme of urban renewal, can be a key factor in the economic and social regeneration of a deprived urban area. Spatial planning is central to any sustainable transport strategy as it can, among other things, reduce the requirement to travel. 9. 4. The Commission has a role to play in the education of the public towards a new approach for transport. Public approval is intrinsic to the success of any new policy. Furthermore local and regional authorities are best placed to communicate the messages of sustainability and environmental protection to the citizens and close co-operation between the two should be fostered to this aim. Compulsory public consultation is a necessary require- 9. 5. ment in advance of the commencement of infrastruction projects. These requirements can, on occasion, extend the project lead in time resulting, in extreme cases, in the loss of fund or the escalation of costs over budget. This problem should be addressed by making the public consultation systems more effective where possible, and at the same time protecting the democratic rights of the citizen. This is an issue that the Commission could address and propose solutions such as best practice when drawing up future guidelines for the Common Transport Policy. 9. 6. The Commission has a significant role to play in attracting private investment into public transport. The Com- C 374/82 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 23. 12. 1999 mission could play a greater role when allocating funding or framing proposals and projects to ensure that they address inter alia, transport safety measures or research into cleaner technologies. Brussels, 16 September 1999. The President of the Committee of the Regions Manfred DAMMEYER Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the ‘Proposal for a Council Directive amending Council Directive 96/53/EC laying down for certain road vehicles circulating within the Community the maximum authorized dimensions in national and international traffic and the maximum authorised weights in international traffic’ (1999/C 374/18) THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS, having regard to the list of Commission proposals pending on 1 May 1999 for which the entry into force of the Amsterdam Treaty entails a change in the legal basis and/or procedure (SEC(1999) 581 final); having regard to the Proposal for a Council Directive amending Council Directive 96/53/EC laying down for certain road vehicles circulating within the Community the maximum authorised dimensions in national and international traffic and the maximum authorised weights in international traffic (COM(1998) 414 final — 98/0227 COD ex-SYN) (1); having regard to the Council decision, as notified by letter of 14 June 1999, to consult it on the matter, under Articles 261 (first paragraph) and 71 of the Treaty establishing the European Community; having regard to the decision taken by its Bureau on 15 September 1999 to appoint Mr Walsh (UK, ELDR) as rapporteur-general, with a view to drawing up an opinion on the matter in accordance with rule 39 of its rules of procedure, adopted the following opinion unanimously at its 30th plenary session of 15 and 16 September 1999 (meeting of 16 September). 1. Introduction 1. 1. Council Directive 96/53/EC deals with, amongst other matters, the introduction of 44-tonne lorries onto Europe’s roads. The European Commission proposal is to modify that Directive to permit a range of vehicles over 40-tonnes all with 11. 5-tonne drive axle weights for combined transport. (1) OJ C 261, 19. 8. 1998, p. 13. Notwithstanding its support for combined transport 1. 2. generally the European Parliament, in its first reading on 15 April 1999, rejected the Commission proposal and request- ed alternative options. 1. 3. The key question for local and regional authorities is whether the proposed transport units will cause more damage that to road infrastructure and require strengthening of infrastructure, notably bridges, insofar as local and regional authorities have responsibilities in this area