Luxembourg, 07/10/2004 (Agence Europe) - Once more, the Transport Council on Thursday in Luxembourg was unable to reach an agreement on the proposal for amending the Eurovignette Directive. After long bilateral meetings, the Presidency could but note that it was impossible to come to consensus, Presidency sources said. The content of the debate on this proposal during the morning already pointed to a negative outcome with France, Austria, Spain, Italy, Portugal, Greece and Lithuania immediately objecting to the compromise text presented by the Presidency. At the time of going to press, the Presidency sought by every means to reach an agreement on another proposal for a directive - that aimed at harmonising provisions on driving licenses Community-wide. The morning's debate on this issue had, however, begun just as badly with a blocking minority composed of Austria, Germany, France, Denmark, Greece, Slovakia and Malta quickly taking shape. The Presidency nonetheless still hoped to reach an agreement on the proposal when discussion resumed.
This was the third time that the Transport Council tried to agree on the proposal to amend the Eurovignette Directive, which aims to establish a common framework for tolls on heavy vehicles using infrastructure of the trans-European transport network. Ministers worked on the basis of a Presidency compromise text distributed on Monday and which mainly: - recommended that Member States allocate the income received from tolls to the transport sector but without making this compulsory; - authorised 15% mark up for tolls in mountainous regions and 25% mark up for the exceptional case of the Brenner Tunnel; - no longer foresaw common compulsory methodology for calculating tolls; - and allowed tolls to vary (see EUROPE of 6 October, p.11).
France, Austria, Spain, Italy, Portugal, Greece and Lithuania immediately objected to this text. France challenged a mechanism which, it said, would threaten its concession system. It also reaffirmed its opposition to any obligation to plough receipts from tolls back into the transport sector, as well as to the percentages foreseen by the Presidency for possibility marking up tolls. Austria considered the text did not sufficiently allow cross-financing for the construction of alternative infrastructures and did not sufficiently take into account internalisation of external costs (mainly environmental). On the other hand, it was naturally in favour of the possibility of increasing tolls in mountainous zones and called for the possibility to mark up tolls by "at least" 25% in the Brenner Tunnel case. Outlying countries like Spain, Italy, Portugal and Lithuania felt the two main problems of the compromise proposed by the Presidency concerned the fact that there was no common binding methodology for calculating tolls and the fact that the receipts from tolls are not, as an obligation, to be re-allocated to the transport sector. Italy also found "unacceptable" the possibility of 25% mark up for the Brenner.