Brussels, 09/09/2010 (Agence Europe) - Discussions on a priority of the Belgian Presidency of the EU Council of Ministers, a proposal relating to the Eurovignette II directive (proposal for a revised directive on taxation of heavy goods vehicles), are expected to resume on Friday 10 September and Monday 13 September. A preliminary exchange of views had been held in July, in particular to define the stances taken by member states, which are very divided on this matter. Three difficulties remain concerning the proposal which introduces into existing legislation the possibility of extending the use of tolls imposed on heavy vehicles (over 3.5 tonnes) to cover the external costs entailed by this form of transport (see EUROPE 9699). The list of external costs to be covered, and in particular the cost of congestion, remains the most controversial issue. The Belgian proposal aims to remove a direct reference to congestion from the text. The cost of congestion would be covered by two levies - one on traffic and the other on better management of traffic flows. While the former does not give rise to much opposition, the second appears to encounter more difficulty. The earmarking of proceeds from the Eurovignette is the second point challenged. The initial Commission proposal, which is also supported by the European Parliament, provided for these proceeds to be reallocated to the transport sector, mainly to reduce pollution caused by traffic. A number of delegations (United Kingdom, Ireland and Sweden) would, however, prefer proceeds to be allocated to the central budget. It is therefore not to be ruled out that the compromise tabled by the presidency may relax this principle. The third question relates to the scope of the text. During the last examination of the proposal in the Transport Council, in March 2009, the opinions of the various delegations differed considerably on this (EUROPE 9872). It is, inter alia, a matter of applying the provisions of the text to all European motorways as initially suggested. Some of the delegations (Italy, Sweden) would, however, prefer only trans-European transport network routes to be concerned. During the EP transport committee's last scrutiny of the text this spring, the EPP Group suggested also extending the scope of the text to vehicles weighing under 3.5 tonnes. The proposal will not be discussed during the informal meeting of transport ministers (Antwerp 15-16 September), which will be mainly devoted to the future of inland navigation in Europe. It is also unlikely that member states will manage to reach a common position for the Transport Council on 15 October. On the other hand, it is foreseeable that the presidency will at that moment present a report on the state of progress of work on the matter.
At a hearing held on Thursday 9 September on the subject of the Eurovignette, the International Road Transport Union (IRU) did not hesitate to criticise the principles set out in the text, especially the fundamental “polluter pays” principle (PPP). “The use of the PPP by policy-makers as an automatic response to all internalisation questions could lead to regulatory failure and to un-quantified and damaging economic costs”, IRU representatives say in a press release. According to a ProgTrans study commissioned by the IRU, the results of which were presented on Thursday, the internalisation of external costs would benefit only two EU member states (France and Germany). Most other member states would suffer deficits. The cost of internalising external costs, or “externalities”, calculated according to the scenario proposed in the Commission proposal (noise and air pollution and congestion), rose in 2009 to €7.9 billion in Europe (EU27 except Cyprus and Malta but with Switzerland and Norway) to reach €11.7 billion in 2030, IRU asserts. These amounts would be in addition to the €23.2 billion (€33.5 billion in 2030) from current road levies, according to the report's estimates. The association also criticises the lack of data available. The proceeds from current levies imposed on heavy vehicles were calculated for the first time in 2007, when they were said to amount to €10.5 billion (in the hypothesis that the directive is applied in all EU countries). (A.By./transl.jl)