Brussels, 04/05/2000 (Agence Europe) - During the debate on the report by Konstantinos Hatzidakis, elected member of Nea Demokratia and Chairman of the Committee on Regional Policy and Transport on the subject of the annual report by the European Commission on trans-European networks (TEN), most MEPs who took the floor noted that, six years after the European Council of Essen setting out fourteen priority projects, concrete achievements are far from corresponding to the ambitions of the Heads of State and Government at the time. More resources most be allocated to trans-European networks, said the rapporteur, supported by many other MEPs. European Commissioner Loyola de Palacio replied by recalling the budgetary problems the Commission is tackling at the present time in order to allow the European Union to face up to all its current commitments (including Kosovo). There are delays, admitted the Transport Commissioner, but she also recalled that "the horizon is 2010" and that there is therefore a certain margin. Our political determination remains "total". But it is better to do something later, with the certainty of doing it well, she added, noting, for example, that a project like that of the Brenner Tunnel has certainly not been abandoned, but poses major difficulties. The Commissioner wished to reassure MEPs who were concerned about the priority given to the alleviation of bottlenecks fearing that peripheral regions or less prosperous regions will suffer. There were many expressing this point of view: Ms Sudre, RPR; Mr Nogueira Roman, from Bloque Nacionalista Gallego; Mr Collins, elected member of Fianna Fail; Mr Esclopé (Hunters, Fishers, Nature, Traditions) and the rapporteur himself, as well as other Greek MEPs.
Presenting his report, Mr Hatzidakis recalled that, for 7 priority projects out of 14, there is neither sufficient financing nor a specific timetable foreseen, and he therefore insisted not only on the question of financing but also on the need to adopt timetables and to keep to them. Mr Hatzidakis announced great attention would be paid to revision of the guidelines for trans-European networks (but other MEPs, like German Christian Democrat Mr Jarzembozski, said at the Commission that one should take time for this revision, and not propose "show projects". The rapporteur also felt the percentage of funding for feasibility studies was too high and called for this to be reduced from 47% to 30% of the financial allocation. He mainly spoke of a project which was above all cited by Italian, German and Austrian MEPs, that of the Brenner Tunnel: Commission, Germany, Austria and Italy must all sit round the table together, he said.
"We say yes to Brenner but we also request that more attention be given to other projects which are environmentally friendly", said Ms Sbarbati on behalf of the budgets committee, also stressing, like other MEPs, that the governments should keep to their promises. At the time of the Prodi government a model of "transversal" financing for the Brenner had been foreseen, noted Mr Ebner (Südtyroler Volkspartei), who recalled that each year one million two hundred thousand lorries pass through the existing tunnel. For the Brenner, we must seek an "optimal" solution, the solution that is "ecologically the cleanest"; we must proceed with finesse and caution", said South Tyrol Green member Mr Messner. Among the Austrian MEPs who took the floor, ÖVP elected member Ms Schierhuber felt, unlike Mr Messner, that there is no longer any need for a study on the Brenner Tunnel, but rather a need for rapid decisions. Regarding the specific situation of her country, she noted that, in Austria, 80% of the transport of goods is by road and only 20% by rail (while in Switzerland it is the other way round, she said). To those who say that the situation is hardly any different, for example, in the Ruhr, and cannot understand "all this agitation", she recalled the configuration of regions like the Tyrol.
Austrian Social-Democrat Mr Swoboda said for his part that the Commission and the three governments concerned are finally forced to act: if they do act, then in five to ten years from now we could have an effective traffic system, was his view. People do not understand why nothing is being done compared to the promises made in Essen, exclaimed FPÖ member Ms Raschhofer. Belgian member of the Bonino List, Mr Dupuis, reaffirmed for his part the need to attach the Balkans to the European network, while Danish Socialist Mr Blak, on the subject of a bridge linking his country to Germany, affirmed: "of course, a bridge makes one afraid, like the EMU, the euro …". Dutch United Left member Mr Meijer felt there had not been sufficient "society debate" on the role of the trans-European networks. The population must understand what the consequences are, he said, noting the difficulties that continue to exist in all the countries (he cited the difference between the railway in the north and south of Spain, the high speed train problems in the Netherlands …). Mr Stenmark, Swedish member of the EPP Group, wondered why there was still no timetable for the "Nordic triangle", i.e. the TGV linking the three Scandinavian capitals. German Green Mrs Schroedter insisted that, in the future, there must be more of a link between "mobility" and "sustainability" and that projects should not be concentrated in already prosperous areas. Mr Jarzembowski pointed out that Parliament had codecision over this matter, and that, "if things were so awful, the Greens should have been opposed" at the time, and noted that one of the projects carried out concerns the "Anglo-Irish" region. Mrs Vachetta and Mrs Cauquil (United Left, France) also expressed opposition to the excessive use of private capital, noting that, were this to be the case, the imperative of profitability would get the upper hand, whereas, as Mrs Vachetta pointed out, what is needed are "European public service railways".
Following the rapporteur (the plenary adopted only one amendment, by the Greens, insisting on the development of "economically sustainable" transport infrastructure), the EP:
- judged necessary an increase in budgetary resources for the trans-European networks and called on Member States, regional and local public bodies and the private sector to provide the Commission with information on the funding they provide to different projects;
- called on the Commission to propose support measures to boost the "Essen" seven priority projects, whose financing is still not guaranteed, and to set a timetable for their completion. The Commission is also asked to develop, in co-operation with the governments of Germany, Austria and Italy, an execution plan for the Brenner base-level tunnel, using private and public means to ensure that it is carried out as soon as possible;
- voiced concern about the risk that the use of private funding for the trans-European networks may be an obstacle to the development of communication in areas which currently have a low per capita income. The revision of the TEN-T guidelines announced by the Commission must not concentrate on existing bottlenecks without taking into account the situation of the peripheral and outermost regions;
- invited the Member States and the Commission to make legislation on public contracts for infrastructure projects clear and flexible, since legal certainty is a fundamental precondition for private sector participation in the execution of the networks.