4. 7. 88 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 175/9 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Directive amending Directive 65/269/EEC concerning 
the standardization of certain rules relating to authorizations for the carriage of goods by 
road between Member States (*) 
(88/C 175/04) 
On 26 February 1988 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, 
under Article 75 of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, on the 
abovementioned proposal. 
The Section for Transport and Communications, which was responsible for preparing the 
Committee's work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 13 April 1988. The rapporteur 
was Mr Eulen. 
At its 255th plenary session (meeting of 27 April 1988), the Economic and Social Committee 
adopted the following Opinion unanimously 
1. The Committee approves the Commission pro­
posal for extending Community rules on removals and 
on vehicle combinations to all countries of the European 
Conference of Ministers of Transport (ECMT) (with 
the exception of Yugoslavia and Turkey in the case of 
vehicle combinations). The proposal involves Directive 
65/269/EEC (2), as amended by Directives 83/572/ 
EEC(3) and85/505/EEC(4). 
2. There is no need to repeat here what the Commit­
tee has already said about these Directives (5). It is 
nevertheless regrettable that no action has been taken in 
response to the Committee's proposal that multilateral 
authorizations for removals be introduced under a sep­
arate Directive rather than by amending the initial 
Directive 65/269/EEC. At the time the Committee had 
rightly drawn attention to the danger that amending 
(») OJNoC59, 3. 3 .1988, p. 5. 
(2) OJ No 88 of 24. 5. 1965, p. 1469/65. 
(3) OJ No L 332 of 28. 11. 1983, p. 33. 
(4) OJ No L 309 of 21. 11. 1985, p. 27. 
(5) Opinion of 28 November 1963 in OJ No 168, 27. 10. 1964, 
p. 2631/64; Opinion of 23 February 1983 in OJ No C 90, 
5. 4. 1983, p. 1; Opinion of 26 February 1981 in OJ No C 
138, 9. 6. 1981, p. 54. 
Done at Brussels, 27 April 1988. 
Alfons MARGOT the initial Directive for the purpose of introducing 
multilateral provisions covering only removals might 
have an adverse effect on the introduction of multilat­
eral provisions for other transport operations covered 
by the same Directive. 
3. The present proposal may cause a certain amount 
of confusion since, in accordance with ECMT resol­
utions aligning on EC rules, multilateral authorizations 
for removals are to be valid in all ECMT countries 
whereas authorizations for the carriage of goods by 
means of vehicle combinations (tractor and trailer) are 
to be valid in all ECMT countries with the exceptions 
of Yugoslavia and Turkey. 
4. Subject to these reservations, the Committee wel­
comes the Commission proposal. In doing so, however, 
it assumes that there are no loopholes for misusing the 
quota-free authorizations for removals. The Committee 
expects the extension of EC rules to lead to a further 
easing of restrictions on the carriage of goods. As 
far as the exceptions are concerned (Yugoslavia and 
Turkey), the Committee calls upon the Commission 
and the Council to do all in their power to ensure that 
the objections of these two countries are dropped. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee