Brussels, 05/11/013 (Agence Europe) - Unsurprisingly, the debate on the report by Jörg Leichtfried (S&D, Austria) on the revision of the weight and sizes of trucks at the Parliamentary committee on transport (TRAN), on Tuesday 5 November, focused mainly on border crossings by mega trucks. Between the proponents of “eco-combis” and the opponents of “monster trucks”, the divisions appear irreconcilable, even within the EPP. Schematically, the former regard these vehicles as having a short-term ecological and economic advantage and the latter are concerned about the additional long-term cost without any substantial reduction of CO2 emissions in the event of a modal shift from rail to road.
Rapporteur in favour of ban. The rapporteur on this issue nailed his colours decisively to the mast when presenting his draft report: “I completely reject the Commission's proposal and have turned it round entirely”. Indeed, he has amended the text of the European executive in such a way that international transport carried out by the largest and longest trucks is banned. He also speaks out strongly against the fact that the Commission has “abandoned the path followed for decades”. He will be hard put to it to win others over to his point of view, as even the shadow rapporteurs differ in their opinions. He imputes these differences to a lack of preparation on the dossier, particularly the absence of an impact assessment, and declines to work on the basis of “lobbyists' data”, including data from road haulage companies.
Support of S&D and Greens. By and large, the rapporteur can count on the support of his own group and that of the Greens. In the view of the spokesperson to the Greens, Michael Cramer (Germany), taxpayers should not be paying for infrastructure to be adjusted to accommodate these trucks.
EPP divided. The EPP is by no means all singing from the same hymn sheet, on the other hand. Shadow rapporteur Petri Sarvamaa (EPP, Finland) argues that traffic will increase and that transporting goods on longer trucks is synonymous with cutting CO2, but not from the modal share of rail freight as attested in Finland, Sweden and Denmark. On the other hand, another member of the same group, France's Dominique Riquet shares the view of the rapporteur, stating that examples of the successful use of these trucks in the countries of northern Europe is not applicable to all European countries. He argues that “everybody has understood that more goods will be put on these trucks, but the public domain cannot be shared with monsters of this kind. There are other road users and they are massively against: these are the people you represent, not the truckers' lobby”, he told his colleagues. The spokesperson to the group, Mathieu Grosch (Belgium), admitted that some sort of agreement had to be found before it would be possible to find a compromise with the other groups. In a spirit of consensus, he raised the possibility of a network accessible to mega trucks.
ADLE and CRE unequivocally against. The Liberals and Conservatives were the most vociferous in their opposition to the report by Leichtfried. Shadow rapporteur Peter Van Dalen (ECR, Netherlands), added that it is going in the wrong direction: “These are environmentally friendly trucks which make it possible to transport more with less of an impact”. As for Liberal Philip de Backer (ADLE, Belgium), it is not the Commission “upsetting everything”, but the rapporteur.
Consensus on the rest of the revision. This stalemate on the issue of mega trucks is regrettable for the rest of the proposed revision of the directive, which enjoys greater support from the members of the TRAN committee over its proposed adjustments to the design of the trucks in favour of safety and aerodynamics. The deadline for the submission of amendments has been set for 5 December, the vote in committee has been scheduled for February 2014 and the plenary vote for April 2014. (MD/transl.fl)