There are huge uncertainties about the outcome of the votes in the plenary session of the European Parliament on the social and market aspects of the first mobility package (posting of drivers, rest periods and driving time, tachograph, cabotage, market access), which are due to take place on Wednesday 27 March in the middle of the day.
Will the MEPs meeting in the Parliamentary plenary session finally decide on the texts concerning these very sensitive road transport issues on 27 March? And if they decide on texts, what will the content be? It was very difficult, if not impossible, to answer these two questions on Tuesday, March 26.
While on Monday 25 March parliamentarians rejected (by two votes) a request not to vote on the texts (see EUROPE 12220/15), the stakeholders for these dossiers however did not, at this point within a few hours of debates and votes, venture to make any confident forecasts.
As to procedure, the day will be of note for two sessions for the social and market aspects of the first mobility package. A debate will first take place in the morning on all the issues.
However, this will be preceded by a first vote. Members have in fact submitted a request to declare inadmissible the votes on the texts relating to posting and rest periods and driving time, based on Rule 187 of the European Parliament's Rules of Procedure. This was due to the rejection of the draft reports on the subject presented by Merja Kyllönen (GUE/NGL, Finland) and Wim van de Camp (EPP, Netherlands) at the meeting of the Parliamentary Transport Committee on 10 January (see EUROPE 12169/5). Only the text on cabotage, led by Ismail Ertug (S&D, Germany), was adopted at that point.
If this inadmissibility motion were to be adopted by a majority of parliamentarians, then votes on these two files could not take place in the middle of the day.
Otherwise, the votes will take place. That said, at the opening of the voting session, MEPs could decide on a request not to vote on the texts (or text, if those regarding posting and rest periods and driving time were removed from the agenda in the morning), under Rule 169(6) of the Parliamentary Rules of Procedure. This is due to the fact that not all the amendments were translated into all the official languages of the Union by the early evening of Tuesday 26 March.
If this motion, and then this potential request, are not approved by a majority of MEPs, then the votes could well take place. For each of the dossiers, it would first be joint amendments rejecting the Commission's proposal that would be put to the vote. Then the hundreds of amendments were put together into blocks.
So, for the file on posting, the first to be voted on, fifteen blocks of amendments have been tabled. And if one block is adopted, then all the others are dropped. The same process applies to the other files. For rest periods and driving time, ten blocks of amendments (and three additional amendments) will potentially be voted on. And eight blocks of amendments (with some additional amendments) for cabotage.
If MEPs took a position on the texts, Violeta Bulc, Commissioner for Transport Policy, could invite the Romanian Presidency of the Council of the EU and representatives from the Parliament to start inter-institutional negotiations ('trilogues'), although the conclusion of such discussions seems impossible for many observers (see EUROPE 12218/17). The Council of the EU reached agreement on these issues last December (see EUROPE 12152/10).
Before considering any trilogues, Parliament would have had to give its opinion on these issues, which is not obvious today. Wednesday will provide some answers to these questions. (Original version in French by Lucas Tripoteau)