Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the 'White Paper - Fair payment for infrastructure use - A phased approach to a common transport infrastructure charging framework in the EU'
C 198/16 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 14. 7. 1999 Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the ‘White Paper — Fair payment for infrastructure use — A phased approach to a common transport infrastructure charging framework in the EU’ THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS, (1999/C 198/04) having regard to the Commission White Paper — Fair payment for infrastructure use — A phased approach to a common transport infrastructure charging framework in the EU (COM(1998) 466 final); having regard to the decision of its bureau of 15 July 1998 in accordance with the fourth paragraph of Article 198c of the Treaty establishing the European Community, to draw up an opinion on the subject and to instruct Commission 3 for Trans-European Networks, Transport, and Information Society to carry out the preparatory work; having regard to the draft opinion (CdR 408/98 rev. 1) adopted by Commission 3 on 22 January 1999 (rapporteurs: Mr Weingartner and Mrs Bennett); on the basis of the Green Paper — Towards fair and efficient pricing in transport — Policy options for internalizing the external costs of transport in the European Union (COM(95) 691 final); on the basis of the Resolution of the Committee of the Regions on the European Charter of regional and local authorities for a progressive and sustainable transport policy (CdR 347/97 fin) (1); and bearing in mind the Commission’s proposals for directives for the further development of the railways: — amendment of Directive 91/440/EEC on the development of the Community’s railways; — amendment of Directive 95/18/EC on the licensing of railway undertakings; — proposal for a Council Directive relating to the allocation of railway infrastructure capacity and the levying of charges for the use of railway infrastructure and safety certification and the development of combined transport; — amendment of Directive 92/106/EEC on the establishment of common rules for certain types of combined transport of goods between Member States; on the basis of the Opinion of the Committee of the Regions of 16 January 1997 on the Green Paper — Towards fair and efficient pricing in transport — Policy options for internalizing the external costs of transport in the European Union and the Proposal for a Council Directive on the charging of heavy goods vehicles for the use of certain infrastructures (CdR 364/96 fin) (2); on the basis of the Opinion of the Committee of the Regions of 12 March 1998 on a sustainable transport strategy for local and regional authorities and the European Union (CdR 255/97 fin) (3), at its 28th plenary session of 10 and 11 March 1999 (meeting of 11 March) unanimously adopted the following opinion. 1. Introduction 1. 1. The European Commission’s White Paper entitled Fair payment for infrastructure use is the logical continuation of the proposals first mentioned in the Green Paper entitled Towards fair and efficient pricing in transport (4). This white paper is therefore, like the green paper before it, an important part of the European Commission’s strategy for the promotion of more efficient transport systems by the creation of a market in which fair prices are to help underpin transport systems and flows in a way which is sustainable in the long term. (1) OJ C 251, 10. 8. 1998, p. 7. (2) OJ C 116, 14. 4. 1997, p. 58. (3) OJ C 180, 11. 6. 1998, p. 1. (4) COM(95) 691 final. 1. 2. In addition to other work initiated by the Commission, e. g. the report of the high-level groups on public-private partnerships (1997) and transport infrastructure — charges (1998), the joint Transport-Environment Council has also met and discussed the optimum use of existing infrastructure and 14. 7. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 198/17 the move to more environmentally benign forms of transport, as well as calling for reduction of fuel consumption and of noise and toxic substance emissions. The effect of new charging structures should be to promote both the efficient use of existing infrastructure and the efficient provision of new infrastructure. 1. 3. The white paper reiterates the high importance of Europe’s transport infrastructure for economic growth, worker mobility, competitiveness and the quality of life. At the same time, it notes that providing this infrastructure and making the most efficient use of it is becoming increasingly difficult. The Committee notes that current trends in transport use and volume, in conjunction with growing over-use of infrastructure and environmental pollution, give rise to doubts as to the sustainability of transport. The Commission’s acknowl- edgement of this in the white paper is welcomed by the Committee. 2. Important themes and guidelines The Committee endorses the following guidelines set out in the white paper. 2. 1. The exposition of the cost components of transport infrastructure is helpful and useful, because it reveals — independently of the mode of transport in question — the composition of infrastructure costs. An important point is that both fixed costs, which are independent of traffic volume, and variable costs, which depend on volume, have internal and external cost components. A full social cost-benefit analysis for the provision of infrastructure should be carried out by including all these cost components. Furthermore, as the High Level Group on Transport Infrastruc- ture Charging pointed out in their final report, all potential elements of cost should first be identified and then the elements which should form the basis for user charges should be decided. 2. 2. Current taxes and levies on transport are in general not based on a true calculation of costs. This is part of the reason for the present transport problems: — distortions of competition between Member States; — distortions of competition between modes of transport; — neglect of social and ecological aspects; — difficulties with the financing of infrastructure investment. 2. 3. In developing a Community approach to the allocation the infrastructure costs, account should be taken of of subsidiarity principle. Although the same basic charging the major modes of principles should be applied to all transport in each Member State, it is inevitable that the resulting structures and levels of charges will differ by mode and location for different economic and social reasons in different regions. Here, local and regional authorities should be involved in the decision-making process regarding the application of charges, balancing the need to avoid distortions of competition in the EU and local/regional economic, environ- mental and social interests. 2. 4. Similarly, a future Community approach to the allo- cation of infrastructure costs must be implemented in all the Member States on the basis of the same principles and under comparable conditions, with due regard to the polluter pays and territorial principles (payment of costs where they arise). Although account must be taken of local circumstances and so a degree of flexibility must also be an element of the Community approach. 2. 5. The proposed approach to costs is based on the assumption that a charging structure geared to marginal costs is a good solution. Marginal costs are defined as the variable costs incurred as a result of one additional vehicle or transport unit using the infrastructure. Without analysing this approach to cost allocation in detail here, the Committee notes with approval that it lays the foundation for the financing of infrastructure by user charges, and even for revenue from one mode of transport being used to finance infrastructure measures for another mode. Cross-financing will enable the construction of transport infrastructure to provide both con- ditions for intermodality and intra-modal competition. How- ever the Committee also recognize the validity of considering other forms of pricing to marginal social cost pricing, i. e. scarcity pricing. 2. 6. It is correctly intended that the decision on the use of revenue from the proposed charging system should lie with the Member States. This is particularly necessary from the point of view of inclusion of external social costs, as only in this way can the available revenue be used to tackle problems where they occur; for reasons of subsidiarity the regions should also be involved however. Moreover, all other things being equal, the different charging systems currently used in the Member States further distort (For example: different levels of the cost-benefit situation. consumer taxes on fuel mean that consumers try to buy their fuel where it is cheapest rather than where it is to be used. ). 2. 7. The Commission’s proposal of using a charging approach based on marginal costs for the entire transport infrastructure, all modes of transport, terminals, information and communications systems is in line with the call made in C 198/18 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 14. 7. 1999 the COR’s Opinion on the Green Paper entitled Towards fair and efficient pricing in transport (CdR 364/96 fin). The Commission’s Green Paper (COM(95) 691) focused mainly on the issue of road pricing and traffic problems. The Committee welcomes the broadening of the discussion to the entire transport infrastructure. 2. 8. The step-by-step implementation of the new Com- munity approach to charging also corresponds with the views of the regions — see the call made in the Opinion on the Green Paper entitled Towards fair and efficient pricing in transport. A particularly important issue is obtaining agree- ment on the method to be used to calculate marginal costs. This too was referred to in the above opinion. The proposed preparatory Phase I (three years, 1998-2000) should be sufficient for this. 2. 9. The restructuring of existing taxes and levies proposed in Phase II will also be necessary for the implementation of the approach. But as this restructuring is directly linked with the development of general tax policy, the implementation of the charging approach But as this restructuring is directly lined with the development of general tax policy, the timing of the implementation of the charging approach is secondary to governments developing a general tax policy. This might mean Phase II not being implemented at all, for example if not all the preconditions relating to general taxation had been met. 2. 10. Without commenting in detail on the implementation measures provided for individual modes of transport, the Committee would nonetheless like to point out that the white paper concentrates on the priority measures for Phases I and II. 2. 11. Where no data or analyses exist for estimating costs, these must be obtained as a matter of priority. It is appropriate for this work to be monitored by a committee of government experts and the Committee of the Regions would expect to be suitably represented on this body. 2. 12. The methods used for calculating the costs of the various modes of transport should be as uniform as possible. The proposed introduction of transparency of accounts, ‘transport accounts’ and improved transport statistics suggest however that it will not be possible to complete the work quickly and that these methods are therefore unlikely to be available in time. 2. 13. In relation to the necessary changes to transport tax policy, reference is made once again to the related timing problem (see point 2. 9). in the State Aid rules will clearly be necessary to allow for the provision of infrastructure in peripheral regions and regions with low population density. 3. Proposals and Requests 3. 1. With reference to the Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Green Paper entitled Towards fair and efficient pricing in transport (CdR 364/96 fin) of 16 January 1997, doubts are once more expressed as to whether changes in the use of the various modes of transport can be achieved via costs and prices alone. Behaviour is determined by numerous other factors (e. g. psychological, historical, sociological, geographi- cal), so that the demand for forms of transport can be guided by prices only to a limited extent, and the desired changes in behaviour brought about only to an insufficient degree. The Committee suggests other means of changing user behaviour such as ending corporate perks (bonuses) which encourage car use, i. e. tax incentives and free parking. Local and Regional authorities, according to the subsidiarity principle, should be given greater powers to implement measures which may change user patterns as conditions dictate in their area or region. 3. 2. It should also be pointed out once again that costs and prices can bring about changes in behaviour vis à vis transport choices only if useable and equally efficient and competitive alternatives are available. New, alternative transport infrastruc- ture must therefore be created, where needed (e. g. TEN). The white paper at least foreshadows this, in that the approach to the allocation of costs makes provision for the financing of infrastructure from user charges via exceptional charges in excess of marginal costs. 3. 3. The Committee is particularly critical of the failure to achieve almost any progress at all on improving the accuracy of costing. The Commission has issued a multitude of pro- posals for directives and regulations, and green and white papers in an attempt to establish a transport policy geared to present-day needs, naturally including measures relating to transport costs and prices. Implementation of these proposals has however failed miserably, partly because the modes of transport affected have developed counter-strategies and, so far at least, with success, and partly because relevant Council decisions have been blocked by national interests. The Committee of 3. 4. the Regions now expects the decision-makers finally to conduct a complete rethink. The Committee of the Regions would therefore make the following comments and proposals: 2. 14. The rules on state aid are highly relevant to any Community cost system which sets out to establish fair prices for the use of infrastructure, as competition is directly affected. It will therefore be necessary to revise the existing regulations when developing the new system of costs. However flexibility The Committee welcomes the presentation of the 3. 4. 1. white paper as an important basis for continuing the substan- tive discussion on infrastructure costs and expects the issues 14. 7. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 198/19 discussed and the measures/proposals put forward in it to contribute to the implementation of a transport policy based on sustainability. 3. 4. 9. In relation to rail transport, the Committee calls for consideration to be given to the special needs of local and regional transport, particularly with regard to the allocation of capacity and routes. 3. 4. 2. individual The white paper’s measures aimed at modes of transport require a greatly changed structure of transport taxes and levies. The European Union’s regions and local authorities expect to be appropriately consulted on the framing of these tax measures and involved in the decision-making process. 3. 4. 10. Similarly, with regard to regional air transport, which is of particular importance for the local authorities and regions, the Committee calls for close consideration to be given to the allocation of slots and airport charges. 3. 4. 3. The Committee shares the Commission’s view that a new system for the allocation of transport costs can only be introduced step-by-step (especially as it must make allowance for the legal position of the various modes at the start and for the complicated issues raised by the introduction of new changes). The Committee considers however that it should be possible to take the first steps towards the allocation of external costs during the first phase, particularly where environmental pollution and transport volumes make this a matter of urgency. The Committee urges that the new cost allocation 3. 4. 4. system be so designed that payment for transport infrastructure is made at point of use. This means applying the territorial principle; only if this principle is applied can the inclusion of external costs be made transparent. It should be made possible for the directly affected regions to be involved in shaping the new system. The Committee calls for the new system of costs to 3. 4. 5. provide financial incentives for clean technologies in the interests of greater concern for nature and the environment, as such technologies can reduce the negative external cost components. 3. 4. 6. The Committee agrees with the Commission that the decision on the use of revenue from transport taxes and charges should remain the preserve of the Member States. The Committee also considers that wherever possible, revenue should be used at the level of the regions and local authorities. 3. 4. 7. The Committee also assumes that the new cost system will be based on the polluter pays principle. The system chosen should be as simple and transparent as possible and it should be properly publicized to ensure that it is understood by the public. 3. 4. 8. The Committee shares the Commission’s view that, in allocating the costs of road transport, the accent should be on usage-related charges for heavy goods vehicles. It should also be ensured that regional charges are compatible with the charging systems used for conurbations. Charging systems should be established ensuring that disadvantages to HGVs in peripheral areas are not exacerbated. 3. 4. 11. Due to the energy efficiency of shipping relative to other modes of transport such as air and road, both the charging framework and tax policy should aim to encourage a modal shift to short sea shipping and inland waterway transport. This would allow for a significant reduction in CO2 emissions from transport according to the Communication from the Commission on transport and CO2 (COM(1998) 204 final). Furthermore, a careful charging framework and tax policy in the maritime transport sector is necessary to minimise the negative effects of peripherality on regions dependant on shipping. 3. 4. 12. The Committee asks to be appropriately represent- ed on the proposed Committee of government experts on charging for the use of infrastructure in order to be able to represent the interests of the EU’s regions and local authorities there. 3. 4. 13. The Committee agrees with the Commission that the impact of a changed allocation of transport costs on remote areas or areas whose development is lagging behind requires special study. It should be made possible to keep charges lower in areas with underdeveloped infrastructure and low traffic loads and allow flexibility in any measures implemented as local and regional needs dictate. The partici- pation of local and regional authorities under the subsidiarity principle is essential where decisions regarding local conditions are being made. 3. 4. 14. The Committee suggests that, in addition to the studies and research already referred to, basic research should be initiated to establish whether, or to what extent, user behaviour can be influenced by costs and prices and also what are the other major influences on user behaviour. The Committee fears that it would be necessary to set individual costs or costs for each use of the infrastructure so high that it would be economically and/or socially unacceptable and therefore impossible to implement. 3. 4. 15. The Committee of the Regions also suggests that marginal social costs be continuously monitored, as a variety of measures (such as changes in staff and management structures on the railways) can be expected to bring lower costs and thus changed marginal social costs. C 198/20 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 14. 7. 1999 4. Conclusion 4. 1. The Committee of the Regions welcomes the Com- mission’s White Paper and the inclusion of the principles of sustainability, efficiency, and the aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from transport such as CO2. Good transport infrastructure is essential for the economic and social develop- ment of Europe if guided by these key principles. The proposed action in the Commission’s document 4. 2. aim to bring about a modal shift from less environmentally efficient modes of transport such as road and air and encour- ages intermodality with more environmentally efficient trans- port modes such as rail, sea and inland waterways which will reduce congestion on roads and greenhouse gas emissions. However in order to make rail transport more efficient and a real alternative to road transport, a liberalisation in the market is necessary. A single market in rail transport would open access between networks and the Committee encourages the development of the TENS and the Trans-European Rail Freight Freeways which will greatly increase efficiency. Brussels, 11 March 1999. It is clear that 4. 3. taxation and charging the current systems in Europe are significant factors in the distortions in the transport sector and the consequent inefficiencies, congestion and pollution. The Committee welcomes the proposals of a charging system based on the principles of marginal social cost, polluter pays, territoriality and the principle of internalisation of external costs. The Committee emphasis the importance of a full social cost-benefit analysis for the provision of infrastructure as well as data and studies in order to calculate the marginal costing framework. 4. 4. The measures which will be put in place after the establishment of a charging framework will mean significant changes for transport users. Local and regional authorities have a large role to play in promoting more efficient use of transport. A simple and fair charging system which promotes the polluter pays principle and is well communicated to the public will help ensure the support of public opinion and change in attitudes and behaviour. 4. 5. The intended result of the action proposed by the Commission is greater use of transport infrastructure which will be more efficient and will provide patterns of use that are socially and environmentally desirable. The Committee of the Regions endorses this view. The President of the Committee of the Regions Manfred DAMMEYER