Brussels, 19/10/2010 (Agence Europe) - The absence of mandatory earmarking of revenue and the suppression of an additional charge levied for congestion - these are the points most criticised by those signing the agreement negotiated on Friday 15 October by the EU Council of Ministers on a proposal to revise the Eurovignette directive (EUROPE 10236).
The “necessary and difficult” compromise has meant that only two external costs (noise and pollution) have been taken into account, that there is only one recommendation on the allocation of revenue to transport and that exemptions are foreseen for certain categories of vehicles, bemoans the Société nationale des chemins de fer français (SNCF). The Community of European Railway and Infrastructure Companies (CER), European Infrastructure Managers (EIM) and the European rail industry, UNIFE, welcomed this “step in the right direction”, regretting that the agreement was not as strong as it might have been. The three associations added to SNCF's criticism the exemptions possible for vehicles weighing between 3.5 and 12 tonnes, albeit hoping for a final, swift agreement on the proposal. The European Construction Industry Federation (FIEC) suggested that member states that decide to charge should be required to prove that the increase in revenues leads to a parallel increase in infrastructure investment.
The retail, wholesale and international trade representation organisations showed they were more “sceptical” when it came to the underlying principles of the directive. “Not only are companies that rely on transport not directly responsible for congestion, which is caused by the lack of alternatives and insufficient road infrastructure, but they still have to bear the extra fuel and time costs caused by traffic jams”, states a joint release from the associations Eurochambres, EuroCommerce and the European Association of Craft, Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (UEAPME). After the fashion of the road sector, these three organisations criticised the proposed variation of up to 175% in the authorised infrastructure levy to cover the cost of congestion. “The limited opening hours at loading and unloading locations, the severe regulation on driving and testing times and other limiting government measures make this profession more and more difficult”, stresses the European Road Haulers Association (UETR). Criticising the freedom granted to member states regarding the variation in infrastructure charges, the UETR has suggested that the internalisation of external costs should also apply to passenger cars. The International Road Transport Union (IRU) takes the view that the agreement is “inadmissible” and opens the road to fiscal increases without the guarantee that these external costs (externalities) will be truly reduced. The European Parliament transport committee is due to hold an exchange of views next week on the compromise negotiated before proceeding to scrutiny of the text in second reading. (A.By./transl.jl)