The outcome of the vote on Thursday 10 January in the European Parliament's Transport Committee on the social and market aspects of the first mobility package remains unknown.
What position will MEPs take on the sensitive issues on the posting of truck drivers, driving and resting time, tachograph, market access and cabotage, if any? It was very difficult to answer this question on Wednesday 9 January, more than a year and a half after the European Commission unveiled its legislative proposals (see EUROPE 11799).
Presented at the end of 2018 by the three rapporteurs Merja Kyllönen (GUE/NGL, Finland), Ismail Ertug (S&D, Germany) and Wim van de Camp (EPP, The Netherlands), the new draft compromise amendments (see EUROPE 12164) have still not been agreed upon between the main political groups. As proof, many alternative compromise amendments, which will be voted on in blocks, have been tabled for the vote.
There are still two opposing sides: on the one hand, Western European MEPs are in favour of harmonising social and market rules and, on the other hand, Central, Eastern and Peripheral European MEPs are in favour of further liberalisation of the sector.
In an attempt to find a compromise, Mr. van de Camp and Mr. Ertug met on Tuesday 8 January. The Netherlands MEP wanted his counterpart to withdraw his suggestion that trucks should be required to carry out at least one loading or unloading in the company's State of establishment every four weeks. Mr. Ertug expected Mr. van de Camp to support the prohibition of regular weekly rest periods (45 hours) occurring on board the truck. Both parliamentarians stand by their positions.
In the European Parliament, few protagonists venture to predict the outcome of the vote. The voting order for texts and alternative compromises is important here.
The text on the posting of truck drivers will be the first to be put to vote, before driving and resting time, with market access and cabotage being voted on last. Regarding the voting order of the compromises for each text, the rapporteurs' documents will be voted on first, before the alternative compromises. Then the votes on the alternative compromises will start with the compromises furthest from the Commission's proposal, ending with the closest ones.
Uncertainty also concerns the very determination of the European Parliament’s position. It is not totally impossible for the Transport Committee to reject the texts, although this option is unlikely. However, the initial ambition was to establish the European Parliament's position at the plenary session to be held from 14 to 17 January.
Member States adopted their position at the Transport Council meeting in early December (see EUROPE 12152). The Transport Committee had already taken a decision in June 2018 (see EUROPE 12034), before the three draft reports were rejected by the European Parliament during the July plenary session (see EUROPE 12055).
State pressures. In all cases, the vote will be scrutinized by several stakeholders. For example, the Bulgarian, Hungarian, Lithuanian and Polish Ministers of Transport travelled to Brussels to present their views to MEPs. Several other ministers have also, to varying degrees, tried to convince parliamentarians to vote in a particular direction.
As a sign of some concern, Transport Commissioner Violeta Bulc spoke on Wednesday after a meeting with the ministers mentioned above, to reiterate the importance the Commission attaches to seeking agreement before the end of the current parliamentary term.
"Europe needs clear rules for the road transport sector. Status quo is not an option! Without a solution, we will face a multiplication of uncoordinated national requirements", she said.
Civil society is not to be outdone. Truck drivers' unions have been taking action since the beginning of the week to express their concerns, and several transport organisations have also made their views public. (Original version in French by Lucas Tripoteau)