Negotiators from the European Parliament and the EU Council met for the third time on the evening of Monday 2 October to continue the interinstitutional discussions (trilogues) on the revision of the regulation on the development of the trans-European transport network (TEN-T). Chapters 4, 5 and 6, dealing respectively with provisions for intelligent and resilient transport, the implementation of European transport corridor instruments and horizontal priorities, and common provisions, have been discussed at length, but some of the more political points have so far proved divisive.
While negotiations stalled under the Swedish Presidency (see EUROPE 13213/15), due to a lack of room for manoeuvre from the Member States, they have made real progress under the Spanish Presidency, thanks to extensive technical feedback.
According to a European source contacted by EUROPE on Tuesday 3 October, the Spanish Presidency of the EU Council presented the Member States’ ambassadors to the EU (Coreper) with a draft mandate on these three chapters last week. Although there is support for the mandate, some Member States have expressed reservations, particularly on certain political articles. “The Presidency has been authorised to raise them during the negotiations, on condition that they do not deviate from the general approach”, the source reported.
Military mobility
This first point, mentioned in Article 47, is a proposal from the European Parliament. It suggested that when building or upgrading infrastructure on the trans-European transport network, Member States should assess the need, relevance and feasibility of going beyond the requirements set out in Chapter 3 in order to take account of the weight, size or volume of military transport of troops and equipment.
According to a parliamentary source, also contacted on Tuesday, three Member States have expressed their disagreement, arguing that this could have an impact on their policy of neutrality in defence matters. “This is a fallacious argument, as the European Parliament’s addition does not contravene this principle”, commented the source. They explained that the purpose of this amendment was simply to give regulatory recognition to a factual situation. They also claim that the European Parliament is supported by the European Commission.
Fiscal capacity clause
In its proposal, the EU Council amended Article 8 to introduce a fiscal capacity clause. The initial article provided that the Commission could require Member States, by means of an implementing act, to create a single entity for the construction and management of cross-border infrastructure projects of common interest. This general exemption clause would allow Member States to make this requirement subject to budget conditions.
“This would give the Commission the power to use implementing acts for national corridors, whereas at present it can only do so for cross-border routes”, explained the European source. “This clause represents a fundamental safeguard for the Member States”, they added.
On the other hand, the parliamentary source says this clause is “a hard pill for the European Parliament to swallow”, as it constitutes “a huge free pass for the Member States”, who would then no longer be obliged to fulfil their obligations.
Striking a balance
The parliamentary source mentioned other points that still need to be discussed, but are not blocking negotiations: - Article 48 on network maintenance; - Article 58 on the alignment of national plans with European priorities; - Article 62, which deals with deadlines and delays in the completion of works.
“The difficult thing for the text is to find a balance not only within the articles, but also between the articles, in order to achieve an overall balance”, stressed the source.
A fourth trilogue is scheduled for mid-November and, no doubt, a fifth in December, in the hope of reaching a provisional agreement under the Spanish Presidency (see EUROPE 13254/13). (Original version in French by Anne Damiani)