The European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) in turn questioned, on Wednesday 29 July, the ability of EU Member States to complete the central section of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T) as planned by 2030 (see EUROPE 12472/15).
At its July plenary session, the EESC adopted an information report on the evaluation of the TEN-T guidelines 2013-2020 (https://bit.ly/3hN5HxD ) identifying various difficulties.
This evaluation, carried out at the request of the Commission, focused on the objectives and results of the TEN-T. Five major fact-finding missions were carried out by the Committee in this context, in Italy, Poland, Romania, Sweden and Austria.
National priorities. The first obstacle to the completion of the TEN-T pointed out by the EESC is the changing political priorities of the various states.
Although the latter have signed international agreements committing them to building transport infrastructure, the arrival in power of new governments - whose priorities lie elsewhere - is undermining previous commitments.
This was also highlighted in the last TEN-T report of the European Court of Auditors (see EUROPE 12507/18), which also pointed out that cross-border infrastructure projects are not always supported to the same extent by all Member States concerned.
Civil Society. Opposition from citizens and certain stakeholders is also presented as a major obstacle.
The Committee stresses in this connection that TEN-T policies raise important social and economic issues and that proper implementation of projects cannot therefore take place without the involvement and consultation of civil society organisations.
“When this has been done, at an early stage, with extensive information campaigns, the projects are progressing quite well, while when it has not been done, there is strong resistance from some parts of the population”, Alberto Mazzola (Italy), in charge of the EESC’s information report on the evaluation, assured the plenary session.
Finally, the organisation deplores the fact that several countries have underestimated the importance of maintenance. To remedy this, it calls for national contingency plans for financing maintenance and considers that a “European monitoring plan for the core network would be appropriate”. (Original version in French by Agathe Cherki)