Politely thanked by all the coordinators of the Transport Committee (TRAN) of the European Parliament for her work on the new EU mobility strategy (see EUROPE 12616/12), the Commissioner for Transport, Adina Vălean, nevertheless had to try, on Monday 25 January, to convince MEPs of the relevance of many of the initiatives and objectives announced.
The latter have indeed seen in the text drawn up by the Commission a series of commitments that are admittedly ambitious but not very realistic in view of the existing means of putting them into practice.
“These objectives are not achievable”, regretted EPP coordinator Marian Marinescu (Romania), after having asked the Commissioner about the nature of the calculations used to establish the objectives in question.
“To reach them, you need technological developments. Of course, some are already underway, but as you have seen, there are limits. We don’t even have a cure for Covid!”, he added, curious to see “how” the EU would manage to get zero-emission wide-body aircraft ready for the market within 15 years, as the strategy envisages.
“Letter to Father Christmas”
The coordinator of Renew Europe, José Ramón Bauzá Díaz (Spain), echoed by his counterparts from ID and the Greens/EFA, described the strategy as a “letter to Father Christmas”.
“We need to be better connected with reality”, he insisted, referring to the objective of making all regular collective travel of less than 500 km carbon neutral within 10 years. “When you hear such statements, you wonder what will happen! You have some who will implement a ban, others who will not. [...] The sector is not ready for this”, he insisted.
Ciarán Cuffe (Greens/EFA, Ireland), for his part, although agreeing with the argument of the “letter to Father Christmas”, regretted the absence of an ambitious objective: the banning of internal combustion engines (ICE).
“When will transport be free of CO2 emissions?” he asked, lamenting the EU’s refusal to take such a step, even though it is being considered in the UK and in several Member States.
Finally, many MEPs emphasised the strategy’s social dimension. “An aspect that could have been stronger”, in the eyes of Socialist coordinator Johan Danielsson (Sweden).
Elena Kountoura (The Left, Greece), for her part, asked Mrs Vălean about the measures envisaged to ensure that the announced transition would be “fair for all”.
“The Just Transition Fund (see EUROPE 12620/12) will not be enough for this”, warned the MEP, calling on the Commission to take account of the lowest income Europeans when applying the ‘polluter pays’ principle.
Hesitant answer
The Commissioner for Transport has heard the criticisms and has done her best to reassure, although with vagueness and evasiveness.
“Without technological advances, there will be no sustainable strategy. This is why we support innovation”, she first reacted, assuring that the industry is “optimistic” and the companies she spoke to are “confident” about the expected development of new technologies.
In response to concerns about scheduled passenger transport, the Commissioner assured that the aim is not to forego certain transport options but to “offer a carbon-neutral choice”. Then, in response to Mr Cuffe, she acknowledged that she was betting on new fuels rather than banning ICEs.
As in the presentation of the strategy (see EUROPE 12619/12), the Commissioner dodged questions on the social dimension, outlining the few measures envisaged on the subject, assuring collaboration with the European Labour Authority, and acknowledging that “nobody should be left behind”.
Rushing to ban certain modes of transport or to introduce measures that are too severe “could entail such a risk”, acknowledged Adina Vălean. (Original version in French by Agathe Cherki)