30. 1. 89 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 23/43 
Additional Opinion on Community traffic in transit through non-EC countries (Switzerland, 
Austria and Yugoslavia) (!) 
(89/C 23/14) 
On 27 September 1988 the Bureau of the Economic and Social Committee, acting under the 
third paragraph of Article 20 of the Rules of Procedure, decided to draw up an Additional 
Opinion on Community traffic in transit through non-EC countries (Switzerland, Austria 
and Yugoslavia). 
The Section for Transport and Communications, which was responsible for preparing the 
Committee's work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 9 November 1988. The Rapporteur 
was Mr Cavazzuti. 
At its 260th plenary session (meeting of 24 November), the Economic and Social Committee 
adopted the following Opinion by a unanimous vote. 
1. Introduction 
1.1. The completion of the internal market and the 
development of the common transport policy require a 
lasting solution to the problems of Community transit 
through Switzerland, Austria and Yugoslavia. The 
obstacles which these countries put in the way of transit 
traffic, in particular by road, also impede Community 
trade and the freedom to provide transport services. 
The elimination of these obstacles, even bit-by-bit, is 
therefore important for all Member States of the Com­
munity and hence constitutes a real Community issue. 
It is the underlying reason for the bilateral negotiations 
between the Community and the three countries in 
question, and is so crucial that one is bound to conclude 
that unless fair and balanced solutions are found, the 
completion of the single market by 1992 will be in 
jeopardy. 
1.2. On 7 December 1987 the Council authorized 
the Commission to embark on the first phase of the 
negotiations with Austria, Switzerland and Yugoslavia. 
The main point of this first phase was to identify 
existing problems and possible solutions and to prepare 
the ground for the negotiations proper on the most 
important issues. 
2. The Committee's comments 
2.1. The Committee voiced its views on this subject 
in its Own-initiative Opinion of 23 March 1988 (x) 
(Rapporteur: Mr Cavazzuti). Even though it is beyond 
dispute that every country has sovereign rights and 
can decide by itself how to exercise these rights, the 
Committee underlined that 'it is through negotiations 
—and in no other way—that ways will have to be 
found of restoring basic conditions of equality and non­
discrimination for Community goods and traffic in 
transit through the three countries in question'. 
The Committee is anxious to reaffirm the approach 
and thinking of this Opinion in every respect, and all 
the specific comments formulated therein. 
(J) OJ No C 134, 24. 5. 1988. 2.2. The Commission has just completed the 
exploratory phase in the transit negotiations and is 
asking the Council to give it a new mandate to complete 
a second phase in the negotiations with Austria, Switz­
erland and Yugoslavia by 31 December 1989. 
2.3. The Committee's Section for Transport and 
Communications was fully briefed on the results of the 
first phase at its 12 October 1988 meeting. At this 
meeting, the Commission gave a detailed picture of (a) 
the overall Community position on the problems linked 
to transit and (b) the practical proposals which the 
Commission was prepared to put forward during the 
second phase of the negotiations with each of the three 
transit countries with a view to seeking a fair solution 
to these problems. 
2.4. The Committee is delighted to note that the line 
taken by the Commission completely tallies with its 
aforementioned Opinion's general thinking and the 
wishes voiced therein. The Committee is particularly 
pleased to see that the Community has adopted a firm 
and resolute negotiating stance while at the same time 
evincing a spirit of understanding and a willingness to 
cooperate at a practical level. 
2.5. The Committee notes that Community transit 
through Austria, Switzerland and Yugoslavia raises 
important problems both for those three countries and 
for the Community. However, it is necessary to respect 
the independence of each negotiating party, and to be 
absolutly clear about the goal being pursued. Further­
more, each of these countries has special problems of 
its own (although their circumstances are similar, and 
in some respects interdependent). Accordingly, separate 
negotiations must be held with each country, although 
these must be coordinated and more or less concurrent. 
2.6. At the meeting in Berlin on 13/14 October, the 
Consultative Committee's representatives of the Euro­
pean Free Trade Association (EFTA) voiced the hope 
that the negotiations on Community transit could be 
No C 23/44 Official Journal of the European Communities 30. 1. 89 
tackled jointly by the EEC and EFTA, but the fact 
remains that the political and legal prerequisites do not 
exist for EFTA to act as the EEC's fully legitimate 
negotiating partner. 
2.7. The main problems highlighted during the initial 
phase of the negotiations with the three countries may 
be summarized as follows: 
2.8. Yugoslavia 
2.8.1. The Committee is pleased to note that Yugos­
lavia is generally quite willing to accept transit traffic 
and look for equitable solutions to the problems result­
ing therefrom. It notes, however, that this country 
thinks that these problems are not of primary import­
ance and must be considered in the general context of 
relations between the Community and Yugoslavia in 
the field of transport. 
2.8.2. The idea of holding general negotiations is 
certainly an interesting one, but they run the risk of 
producing too sweeping conclusions and failing to pro­
vide adequate solutions to the most pressing and real 
problems. The Committee would urge that the Com­
munity's short-term objective during the second phase 
of the negotiations with Yugoslavia should be to solve 
the problems specifically associated with transit traffic; 
the gradual integration of Yugoslavia's transport sys­
tem and transport policy into the Community's, though 
not to be neglected at this stage, must be considered in 
the longer term. 
2.8.3. The Committee acknowledged that Yugos­
lavia's main priority in the transport sector is to develop 
its infrastructure (road and rail). Since this development 
also has implications for intra-Community transit, the 
Community ought to help to fund the building of this 
infrastructure in every possible way, and in so doing 
offer easier terms than at present. 
2.8.4. The Committee also thinks that in future the 
two sides should make a closer study of the legal 
possibilities available or in preparation for establishing 
joint ventures to build and administer certain sections 
of transport infrastructure in Yugoslavia. 
2.9. Austria 
2.9.1. Austria, for its part, is entirely willing to nego­
tiate and play an active part in the completion of the 
Community's internal market. 
2.9.2. The Committee acknowledges that Austria 
has accepted a large part of the Community road-transit 
traffic which Swiss measures have diverted away from 
Switzerland. It agrees that such traffic, which mainly 
uses the North-South transit route (Brenner), should not be increased beyond the level at the time of the 
negotiations. 
2.9.3. The Committee would point out in this con­
nection that observance of the status quo—i.e. the 1987/ 
1988 figures—could be a useful point of reference for 
the negotiations. This status quo should, of course, also 
be observed by the Community, especially as regards 
certain fundamental issues such as weights and dimen­
sions. Despite this, there are proposals and preparatory 
documents which tend in the opposite direction. 
2.9.4. One suitable way of limiting the future volume 
of transit traffic passing through Austria by road would 
be to make better use of existing capacity in the field 
of combined transport—which is underutilized at the 
moment, especially in Switzerland. 
2.10. Switzerland 
2.10.1. From the detailed information it has received, 
the Committee is prompted to express concern about 
the Swiss situation, how it may develop and what effect 
it may have on intra-Community trade. 
2.10.2. The Commission's proposed solution to the 
preliminary problem of transit traffic by road is to 
create a road transit corridor open, within certain 
limits, to 40 tonne lorries. The Committee calls on the 
Commission to re-affirm and maintain this stance. 
2.10.3. Adequate solutions to the other problems 
(infrastructure, border formalities, environmental pro­
tection, access to the market and the under-use of 
combined transport) will require concrete proposals. 
In the field of combined transport in particular, such 
proposals will have to be submitted by the rail 
companies and Switzerland. 
3. Conclusion 
3.1. The Committee endorses the Community's gen­
eral approach to the second phase of the negotiations 
and hopes to be informed of the progress made. It trusts 
that the negotiations will be successfully completed as 
quickly as possible, remembering their vital importance 
for the completion of the internal market. 
3.2. In particular, it agrees most strongly that if 
negotiations with one of the transit countries run into 
serious difficulties, reciprocal measures should be 
adopted and that these should be included in the wider 
context of the Community's general relations with the 
country in question. 
30. 1. 89 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 23/45 
4. In view of the fundamental problems which have 
also emerged in the negotiations, the Committee won­
ders whether the time might have come for a careful review of the Community's transport policy, as the 
achievements of the current policy have sometimes been 
less than outstanding. 
Done at Brussels, 24 November 1988. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alberto MASPRONE 
Opinion on: 
— the proposal for a Council Directive on the contained use of genetically modified 
microorganisms, and 
— the proposal for a Council Directive on the deliberate release to the environment of 
genetically modified organisms (!) 
(89/C 23/15) 
On 30 May 1988 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, 
under Article 100 a of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, on the 
abovementioned proposals. 
The Section for Protection of the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Affairs, which 
was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 
8 November 1988. The Rapporteur was Mr von der Decken. 
At its 260th plenary session (meeting of 24 November 1988), the Economic and Social 
Committee unanimously adopted the following Opinion. 
Although evidently connected, the two proposals differ 
in their scope and raise different problems. They will 
therefore be examined separately, in order. 
1. Proposal on contained use 
1.1. General comments 
1.1.1. The proposal responds to the need to harmon­
ize the different provisions in the Member States. The 
Committee supports this proposal, subject to the com­
ments which follow. 
1.1.2. Since 1972, the 'in-vitro recombination' of 
genes or what we now call 'genetic engineering' has 
become firmly established in biological, biochemical 
and medical research. This technology is also increas­
ingly used for industrial and agricultural purposes. 
OJ No C 198, 28. 7. 1988, p. 9-19. Its development was initially constrained by very 
restrictive guidelines which had been proposed and 
finalized by the scientists involved. As experience 
accumulated, the guidelines were adapted to the know­
ledge acquired. In general this meant relaxing the 
restrictions. 
1.1.3. The main aim of these guidelines, which exist 
in all countries engaged in research, has been to protect 
people who are directly involved in experiments or 
industrial uses and the environment from harm or 
potential harm. Two measures were combined in order 
to guarantee maximum safety. 
a) The in-vitro recombination of genes and work with 
genetically modified organisms must take place 
under conditions which have already been proved to 
provide a hazard-free setting for work with micro­
organisms and especially pathogens. A wealth of 
experience can be drawn on regarding work with 
even highly pathogenic agents, both in laboratories