ARCHIVESHISTORIQUES
DELACOMMISSION
COLLECTION RELIEEDES
DOCUMENTS "COM"
COM(81)333
Vol.1981/0107

Disclaimer
Conformément aurèglement(CEE,Euratom)n°354/83duConseildu1erfévrier1983
concernantl'ouvertureaupublicdesarchiveshistoriquesdelaCommunauté économique
européenne etdelaCommunauté européenne del'énergieatomique(JOL43du15.2.1983,
p.1),telquemodifiéparlerèglement(CE,Euratom)n°1700/2003du22septembre2003
(JOL243du27.9.2003,p.1),cedossierestouvertaupublic.Lecaséchéant,lesdocuments
classifiésprésentsdanscedossierontétédéclassifiés conformément àl'article5dudit
règlement.
Inaccordance withCouncilRegulation(EEC,Euratom)No354/83of1February1983
concerningtheopeningtothepublicofthehistoricalarchivesoftheEuropeanEconomic
Community andtheEuropeanAtomicEnergyCommunity (OJL43,15.2.1983,p.1),as
amendedbyRegulation(EC,Euratom)No1700/2003of22September2003(OJL243,
27.9.2003,p.1),thisfileisopentothepublic.Wherenecessary,classifieddocuments inthis
filehavebeendeclassified inconformitywithArticle5oftheaforementioned regulation.
InÜbereinstimmung mitderVerordnung(EWG,Euratom)Nr.354/83desRatesvom1.
Februar1983überdieFreigabederhistorischen ArchivederEuropäischen
Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft undderEuropäischen Atomgemeinschaft (ABI.L43vom15.2.1983,
S.1),geändertdurchdieVerordnung (EG,Euratom)Nr.1700/2003vom22.September2003
(ABI.L243vom27.9.2003,S.1),istdieseDateiderÖffentlichkeit zugänglich.Soweit
erforderlich,wurdendieVerschlusssachen indieserDateiinÜbereinstimmung mitArtikel5
dergenanntenVerordnungfreigegeben.

COMMISSION OFTHEEUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
COM(81)333 final
Brussels.29thJune1981
'- .
I
//
REPORTONTHEIMPLEMENTATION OFTHECOUNCIL.DECISION
OF20FEBRUARY1978
instituting aconsultation procedureandsettingup
acommitteeinthefieldoftransportinfrastructure
C0M(81)333final

*ν
Report*»-N^heimplementationof"theCounoilDecision\of20February1978
\
..:>
1_#Articxeof"theCouncil*%£isionof20February1978institutinga
consultationprocedureandsettingvrcommitteeinthefieldoftransport
infrastructure *stipulate -.,that*
"TheCommissionshallforwardatleasteverjNy^^yearsto-theCounciland
■totheEuropeanParliamentareportontheinfoi\,..^on^hasreoeivedin
accordancewiththisDecisionandontheCommitteeActivities.Where
anr_-„•-•.$,"wisrepor*nhallinoludeobservationsais^informingthe
"MemberStatesoftheCommunitytransportinfrastructure\,qUirements.w
2.TheCommittee'stasksarelaiddownbyArticle5the-.^oisionl
"ItshallprovideaforumforthecongultationreferredtoinArtiol*»3on
aprojectorprojectsofinteresttotheCommunity.
AttherequestoftheCommission,itshallorganize,takingintoaccountany
vievqinrelationtoitstasksexpressed "byotherCommunitybodiess
(a)exchan/^sofinformation onthenotifications oftheplansandprogrammes'
referredtoinArticle2j
(b)examination'ofanyquestionconcerningthedevelopmentofatransport
networkofinteresttotheCommunity."
3.Itisdearfromthesearticlesthatinformation ontransportinfra­
structuresshouldbasicallybeprocessedinthecontextoftheCommittee,
whoseworkshouldmakeitpossibletoformageneralpictureofthe
Community'srequirements . .
Forthesakeofclarity,thisreporthasbeendividedintothree
mainsections,corresponding totheCommittee'sbasictasks,i.e.oonsultation
exchangesofinformation onplansand-programmesandexaminationofany
questionconcerningthedevelopmentofa"transportnetworkofinterestto
theCommunity",thoughthesetasksoftenoverlaptoalargeextent.
*OJNo.L54,25February1978,p.16

Sofar,insufficient progresshasbeenmadefortheCommissiontopresentanyfirm
conclusionsaaregardstheCommunity'srequirements .Nevertheless ,thefinalpart
ofthereportwillincludeanumberofthoughtsonthissubjeotdesignedtohighlight
thepracticalaspectsoftheworkcarriedouttodateandtoshowhowaolearer
pictureofrequirements shouldgraduallyemerge.
4.ItshouldalsoberememberedthatonanumberofoccasionstheCommission has
informedtheCouncilandParliament oftheresultsofvariousstudiesconductedin
conjunction withtheCommitteeandofitspositiononmattersrelatingtoinfra­
structure(seeinparticulartheCommissionMemorandumontheroleoftheCommunity
inthedevelopment oftransportinfrastructure *andthereportonbottlenecks and
possiblemeansoffinance**).
Consequently ,inmanyplacesthisreportwillBimplyreiteratepreviously
expressedviewpoints.
5.TheTransportInfrastructure Committeehelditsfirstmeetingon22June1978,
mainlytosortoutitsworkprogrammeandprocedures.Furthermeetingswereheldin
October1978,May1979tFebruary1980andMarch1981.
ThisreportdescribeswhattheCommitteedidbetweenJune1978andMarchI98I
withaviewtoimplementing theDecisionof20February1978.Inaccordancewith
Art«5para.3oftheDecisionof20February1978,thememberaoftheCommitteehave
beenconsulted.
CONSULTATION ONPROJECTS OFCOMMUNITY INTEREST
6.OneoftheCommittee'sbasiotaakBistoprovideaforumfortheconsultation
referredtoinArticle3»WhenaprojectofCommunityinteresthasboennotifiedto
theCommissionbyaMemberState(art.2),thisconsultationisinitiatedeitherby
theCommissionorbyaMemberSt-\te.
TodateonlytheGrandIhichyofLuxembourghasinvokedtheconsultation
procedure(notificationofprojectsofCommunityinterestandconsultation onthese
projects).Thefirstconsultations wereheldon13MarchI98Itodiscussvarious
projectsaimedatraisingthemajorinternational roadlinksthroughtheGrandDuchy
tomotorwaystandard.
TheCommissioninformedtheMemberStatesoftheoutcomeoftheseconsultations ,
asrequiredbyArticle3oftheDecision.
*COM(79)550final,14November1979
**COM(80)323final,20June1980

7.Theconsultations providedanopportunity ,todiscuss *anumberof
questionsraisedbytheLuxembourgprojects(notablythelikelyamountof
traffic,thebestpossibletimetablefortheworkinvolvedandcoordination
withprojectsinneighbouring MemberStates)andtomakesurethatthework
wouldcontributetotheharmonious development ofatransportnetworkinline
withtheCommunity'srequirements andhenceraisenoobjections fromthe
othe'rMemberStatesorfromtheCommission .
However,itwasfoundthatthe"background information relatingto
certainprojectsrequiredfurtheranalysis.Theconsultations onthose
projectsarenotyetregardedasclosedandwillberesumedatalater
stage.
■«
Theconsultations alsopointedtothefactthatprojectsconcerning
transportnetworksthatbearheavylong-distance trafficareofteninter­
dependent andhaveoverlapping effects.Whencompleted,theLuxembourg
projectsarelikelytohaveaprofoundimpactontrafficlevelsbothonthe
roadswhichlinkupwiththeupgradedstretchesintheGrandDuchyandon
alternative routes.Theywillthereforeaffecttheroad-building programmes
fortheseroutes.Consequently ,theCommission hasstressedtheneedfor
furtherinformation oninternational traffictrendsandtrafficdistribu­
tionfortheseroutesandfortheCommitteetoinitiateanexchangeof
.viewsonallprojectswithabearingontheGrandDuchy'sprojects.
EXCHANGES OFINFORMATION ONTHENOTIFICATIONS OFPLANSANDPROGRAMMES
8.Conditionsfortheexchangesofinformation weresatisfactory .Member
StatesnotifiedtheCommissionoftheirplansandprogrammes,asrequired
byArticle2oftheDecisionof20February1978.
Itwasfoundthattwostepswereneededinordertomakeiteasierfor
theCommission andtheCommitteetodrawontheextensive documentation
whichtheindividual MemberStatessubmittedtotheCommission inawide
varietyofforms.
9.Firstly,theinformation fromtheMemberStateshadtobepresented
inamorereadilyaccessible form.TheSecretariat oftheCommittee :
thereforeconvertedtheinformation intosynopsesandtables.

-4-
10.Secondly,theCommissionattemptedtopinpointthoseaspectsof
theplansandprogrammes whichwerelikelytobeofmostdirectuseto
theCommunity.
Oneofthefirsttasksthisinvolvedwastopiecetogetherfromthe
plansandprogrammes apictureofthefutureinfrastructure oftheCommu­
nity'sbasictransportnetworks.Thisprovedtobemuchmoredifficult
"thanhadappearedatfirstsight.Thereareenormousdifferences inthe
horizon,legalforceanddepthofdetailoftheindividual MemberStates'
plansandprogrammes.Tomakethingsworse,theeconomiccrisisand
theconcomitanteffectsontrafficdensity,trafficstructureandthe
budgetappropriationsavailableforinfrastructure investment havecast
aconsiderable shadowovertheMemberStates'programmes .Thedraftmaps
whichtheSecretariat hasdrawnupasabasisfordiscussionwillhave
tobeamendedbeforetheycanassumetheirfullrole.
TheCommissionalsofeltthatspecificaspectsoftheplansand
programmes neededtobeexamined (e.g.methodsinvolvedinthedecision-
makingprocessandcriteriaasregardsinfrastructure capacity).
TheorderofpriorityproposedbytheCommissiontotheCommittee
fortheexamination ofthesequestionstookintoaccounttherequirements
oftheCouncil.Inthecourseofitsdiscussions ontheproposalfor
aRegulationonthefinancingoftransportinfrastructure projectsof
Communityinterest,inNovember1978,theCouncilcalledontheCommission
tosubmittworeports,oneonbottlenecks andtheotheronthecriteria
forassessingCommunityinterest.
TheCommitteehelpedtopreparethesereportsaspartofits
generalactivities (examination ofquestionsconcerning a"transport
networkofinteresttotheCommunity").Theinformation gleanedfrom
theplansandprogrammesprovidedvaluablehelpduringthepreparation
ofthereports.

QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE"TRANSPORT NETWORK OFINTEREST TOTHECOMMUNITY"
11.Reportonbottlenecks aridpossiblemodesoffinance:
Thisreport,whichtheCommitteehelpedtoprepare,wasforwardedby
theCommission totheCouncilon20June1980.TheCounciltooknoteofit
on4December 1980.
Itgivesanoverallviewoftrafficconditions ontheCommunity's
mainarteries,andindicatestheamountofinvestment thattheMember
Statesregardasbeingnecessary.
Althoughitwillneedtobesupplemented orrevised,eveninitspresent
formthereportisanextremelyusefulbasisforselectinggroupsofinter­
dependentprojectssuitablefordiscussion inthecontextofconsultations
onthelinesofthoseinvokedbytheGovernmentoftheGrandDuchy.The
reportalsocontains amoredetaileddefence,ofthesystemputforward
-bytheCommissionforthefinancialsupportoftransportinfrastructures ,
whichtheCouncilisnowexamining.
»
12.Thereportontheassessmentof .'Communityinterestisnearingcompletion
andwasdiscussedby theTransportInfrastructure Committee (whichhelped
withthedraftingofthereport)on13March1981.
Thereportwilltakeasitsstartingpointthecost-benefit analysis
methodswhichtheMemberStatesuseintheirdecisionmaking.Itwill
attempttopinpointthespecifically Communityaspectsandtoshow
thattheycanbeassessedandincorporated innationalstudies.
\
OBSERVATIONS AIMEDATINFORMING THEMEMBERSTATESOFTHECOMMUNITY'STRANSPORT
INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIREMENTS
13.DuringthisinitialphaseofCommunityaction,themachinerysetupby
theDecisionof20February1978forcooperation betweentheMemberStates
andtheCommission hasbeenrunin,andafirmfoundation hasbeenlaid
fortheeffortstodefinetheCommunity'sinfrastructure requirements .

-6-
Work hasnotyetreached astage where anyfirm conclusions based on
asolid economic foundation canbepresented oranychecks made toseewhether
theprojects included inthe'Member States orprogrammes are fully inline
with theCommunity 'srequirements .,Jtwould also befruitless torecapitulate
-thegeneral aims ofa"transport network ofinterest totheCommunity ",since
these have been described inmany previous Commission documents .
However ,this would seem tobean -opportune moment todraw attention to
thepractical aspects of .thework that hasbeen done oriscurrently
under wayand toitsimportance for theMember States andthe Commission
alike ,and atthesame time tofehow how .these activities fit inwith the
various approaches which ,inthecontext ofthework programme that the
Commission submitted totheCouncil inOctober 1980*will culminate ina
statement of .thedommunity 'srequirements by1983
*)C0M(80)582 final ,21October 1980 .

-7-
Practicalaspectsofthework (,
1U.ALLtheMemberStatesarenowtakingmuchmorecarethanhithertoto
minimizethedangerofmakingmistakesintheirinfrastructure programmes.
Forexample,theyaretryingtoforecasttrendsintransportdemandon
thebasisofscenarioscoveringallthemostimportantparameters andon
thebasisofstrategichypothesesasregardsthedevelopment ofcertain
policieswhichhaveabearingontransport.Inviewofthecurrentdegree
ofeconomicintegration andtheinterdependence oftransportnetworks,itis
clearlyintheMemberStates'bestintereststocoordinatetheirdecisions
andavoiddifferences,particularly whereparametersandhypothesesrelating
tothewhoLeCommunityareconcerned (e.g.international traffictrends,
integrationofperipheralregions,industrialredeployment,measuresaiming
atmakingbetteruseofinfrastructure capacity,promotionofcertaintypes
·< I
-oftransport,particularly inthecontextofcooperation betweenrailway
companies).
Withthehelpoft?heMemberStates,theCommissionhasundertaken
forwardstudiesrelatingtotrafficontheCommunity'sbasicroad,railand
inlandwaterwaynetworksrTTheresultswhichwillbeavailableattheend
* •-
oftheyearshouldprovidepointerstofutureinadequacies whereinfrastructure
-isconcerned.Nevertheless,thebasicframeworkwhichhasbeenestablished
willhavetobeconsolidated andgivenamorepreciseshapeifitisto
providetheMemberStateswiththepermanentstoreofvaluable,itemized
reference -materialthattheyneedinordertosimplifythecoordination
.oftheirprogrammes.
TheCommitteehasreceivedregularprogressreportsonthesestudies,
anditsadvicewillbesoughtintheworkahead,particularly whereimportant
decisionsaretobetaken.
S
15.Onthebasisofthenationalplansandprogrammesofwhichithasbeen
notified,andasaresultofpreparing,inconjunction withtheCommittee,
thereportonthecriteriaforassessing Communityinterest,theCommission
isin-apositiontoappreciatethestringentdemandsihatMemberStatesplace
onthemethodswheretayinvestmentdecisionsaretaken.Clearly,thedemands
^reevengreateratCommunitylevelinviewoftheprospectofthefinancial
supportsystemwhichtheCommissionhasputto-theCouncilbeingemployed.

-8-
However,evenapartfromthisfinancialaspect,MemberStatesareclearly
keentopooltheirexperience andworkoutamethodofincluding
."Communityinterest"asoneofthecriteriaforassessingtheirownnational
projectsandoffacilitating theexamination ofprojectsatCommunitylevel.
Theappliedresearchalreadycarriedout(e.g.fixed.cross-Channel link)
orunderwayinthisfield,aboutwhichtheCommitteeiscontinously kept
informed,willhelpdevelopbettermethodsandincreasetheamountofinforma­
tionavailableabouttheCommunityaspectsofcertainmajorprojects.
Furtherprojectstudieswouldseemtobeapromisingavenueofapproach.
Fittingtheworkintothevariousapproachesduetoculminateinastatement
oftheCommunity'srequirements
16.ThenextfewparagraphsdescribethevariouswaysinwhichtheCommunity
canapprisetheMemberStatesoftheCommunity'stransportinfrastructure
requirements .
17,Designation ofprojectsofCommunityinterest
Thefactthatthe"Communityinterest"conceptisbothacriterionfor
initiatingtheconsultation procedureandacriterionforassessing
andevaluatingprojectsmakesitratherambiguous.Itisthereforeimportant
todefineourtermssince"Communityinterest"hasdifferentmeaningsindiffe­
rentcontexts.
TheCommission wouldreiteratethat,whendesignatingprojectswhichare
ofCommunityinterestandofwhichtheCommissionshouldbeinformedwitha
viewtosubsequentconsultation,ifnecessary,theCommunityinterestistobe
determined onthebasisoftheextremelygeneral,flexiblecriterialaiddown
bytheDecisionof20February1978.Thesecriteriaaredesignedtoensure
thatprojectsofinteresttotheCommunityareexaminedatCommunitylevel,as
provided -forbytheDecision.
Forexample,thereportonbottlenecks,whichpinpointscurrentinfras­
tructureinadequacies onmajorarterieswithintheCommunityandmentions
variousprojectstoimprovethesituation,coupledwiththeresultsofthe
forwardstudiesreferredtoinparagraph 14(futureinadequacies )willhelp
MemberStatestoselectappropriateprojectsand,inconjunction withthe

«'
?
4.
-9-
Commission/findthebestwayofexaminingtheprojectsatCommunitylevel
(e.g.preliminary examination beforeconsultation procedure/groupingprojects
together/supplementary datatobecollected/andsoon).
Themereactofdesignating aprojectasbeingofCommunityinterest
isinsufficient toestablishthenatureandpreciseextentofthatCommunity
interest/whichcanonlybedetermined atalaterstageintheprocedure.
TheCommissionisoftenaskedto,recognizespecificprojectsasbeingof
Communityinterest.However/nosuchrecognition canhave 1anypractical
meaningunlesstheMemberStateconcerned hasnotifiedtheCommission of
theprojectandtheprojecthasundergonedetailedexamination atCommunfty
levelandbeenfound/afterexhaustive examination/tobefullywarranted
fromthesocialandeconomicpointofview.
18.Assessment ofprojectsofCommunityinterest
Thisstageoftheprocedureinvolvesformingaclearerpictureofthe
projects'implications fortheCommunityandcheckingthattheyarein
linewiththeCommunity'srequirements . ~
„;.Theconsultation procedureisaparticularly useful'instrument forthis
purpose/thoughitdoesnotprecludeexamination aspartoftheCommittee's
generalactivities . ,
The.analysisframeworkcouldbeimprovedbymeans\ofthemethodput
forwardinthereportontheas-sessmentofCommunityinterest.The-forward
studieswillprovidethebasicfiguresrequiredforanalysispurposes.•
. ■4
19,AssessmentofCommunityinterest
ThefinancialsupportsystemproposedbytheCommissionisin-tendedas
-'ameansofgrantingaidtowardsselectedinfrastructure projectswhichare
warrantedfromtheCommunitypointofviewbutwhicharenotincludedinthe
nationalprogramme^.-despitethefactthattheyareviable.Assessment

-10-
oftheCommunityinterestofsuchprojectsfromthesocialandeconomic
viewpointsisessentialifthesystemistofunctionsmoothly.One
reasonwhytheCouncilexpresslyrequestedtheCommission topreparethe
reportoncriteriaforassessing Communityinterestwasthatitneeded
background information givingamuchbroaderideaofthewayinwhich
thesystemcouldoperateinpractice.
Quiteapartfromthequestionoffinancialsupport,anassessment of
thistypemayalsobeneedediftheCommunityiscalledupontodelivera
reasonedopiniononanyspecificproject.
ItshouldalsoberememberedthatthedraftRegulation onfinancial
supportstatesthattheCommitteeshallprovideaforuminwhichMember
Statescanenterintoconsultations onanyapplications forsupportthat
theyhavesubmitted.
20.Articulation ofCommunityrequirements
AslongastheMemberStatesgivedueconsideration totheoutcomeof
theconsultations andtaketheinterestsoftheCommunityintoaccountwhen
drawinguptheirplans,nationalplansandprogrammes shouldeventually
broadlyreflecttheCommunity'sspecificrequirements .Wherevernational
requirementsstilldifferfromCommunityrequirements,evenafterthe
nationalplanshavebeenrevisedorextendedinthisway,theCommission
willhavetolookintotheworkthathasbeendoneandinformtheMember
Statesconcernedofanyshiftsinemphasisoradditionsthatshouldbemade.
CONCLUSIONS
21.Thisisthefirstreportonthissubject,andcoverstheperiodduring
whichthesysteminstituted bytheDecisionof20February1978wassetup
andduringwhichtheTransportInfrastructure Committee,thecornerstone
ofthesystem,starteditswork.Itwasinevitablethatitwouldtakea
certainamountoftimebeforethe machinerywhichtheDecision
hadsetupforcooperation betweentheCommission andtheMemberStates
cameintooperation,particularly theconsultation procedure .
Nordoesthefactthatnoconclusions haveyetbeenreachedonthe
Community'sspecificrequirements giveanycauseforconcern.

1x1-
TheCommissionfeelsthat,allthingsconsidered/resultstodate
havebeenencouraging .Themainpoints,andthebasiclinesofapproach
whichitfeelsshouldbeadopted,areasfollows.
22.(a)Theconsultation heldprovedthebenefitsofinvokingtheprocedure
laiddownbytheDecisionof20February1978.
Thisheightenstheneedtousetheprocedure moreoften,asthe
Commission hasurgedonnumerousoccasions.Inthiscontext,theCommission
wouldagaindrawattentiontotheproposalsthatithasalreadyputto
theTransportInfrastructure Committee andsetoutinitsconclusions
inthereportonbottlenecks,whereby,inthefirstinstanceatleast,
MemberStatesshouldinvoketheprocedureforgroupsofinterrelated
projectsontherouteswhichareofgreatestimportancetotheCommunity.
ItisimportantthatMemberStatesshouldnotifytheirprojectsofCommu­
nityinterestsothatconsultations canbeheld,eitherattherequest
ofaMemberStateorontheCommission 'sowninitiative .
SuchanapproachbytheMemberStateswouldhelptogiveaclearer
pictureofthebenefitsaccruingtotheCommunityfromthevarious
alternative projectsandenhancethesocio-economic returnonthe
investments planned.
Itwouldalsocontribute towardsmeetingtherequestvoicedby•
theCouncilinNovember1978thataninventoryshouldprogressively be
preparedofspecificoperations which,fromtheCommunity'spointof
vview,thereareconvincing socio-economic argumentsforcompleting
intheshortterm,andwhichcouldqualifyforfinancialsupport
fromtheCommunity.. ' ''.
Consultation doesnotprecludecertainsimpleformsofproject
examinations bytheCommittee aspartofitsgeneralactivities .Such
examinations canhelppinpointprojectsthatareofCommunityinterestand
ensurethatsuitableprojectsarechosenforsubsequent moredetailed
assessments ofevaluations .

-12-
23.(b)Theexchangesofviewsonplansandprogrammes,theworkwiththe
Committeeonpreparingtwomajorreports-oneonbottlenecks andone
i . •
ontheassessmentofCommunityinterest-havecastlightonthe
problemswhichMemberStatesfacewhendrawinguptheirplansandon
thebenefitswhichcanbegain'edfromCommunityactiondesignedto
t>ringclosertogetherthedata,forecastsandmethodsuponwhich
nationaldecisionsare.basedandtofacilitatetheadjustmentcalled
'forbytheinterdependence ofthenationaleconomiesandbythe
Community'srequirements .
Althoughthe,specificresultsarefarfromcomplete,considerable
progresshasbeenmadetowardsincreasingourknowledgeofthefactors
whichaffectinvestment and,assumingfurtheractivecooperation within
theCommittee,awayhasbeenfoundofmakingmoreinformeddecisions
;oninfrastructure investment .
Itshouldbenotedinthisconnectionthatthisprogressisthe
directresultofthesystemsetupbetweentheMemberStatesandthe
Commission bytheDecisionof20February1978.Thissystemtherefore
represents agreatstepforwardincomparisonwiththeDecisionof
20February1966,whichwasconfinedtoinstituting aconsultation .
procedurealone.
24.(c)ThisbriefsurveyoftheCommittee'sactivitiesillustratesthe
thoughtssetoutbytheCommissioninprevbustransportinfrastructure
documentsvnthregardtothecomplexityofthefieldandtheneedfor
decision-makers tobeabletobasetheirchoicesonawiderange
ofextremelycomplexdata.Oneshouldavoidfallingintothetrap
-.ofseekingexcessiveperfectionism,butatthesametimethe
unbendingrulemustbetohaveasolideconomicfoundationfor
investmentdecisions,particularly wheneconomicfactorsdictate
theshrewduseofresources.Thiseconomicfoundationwillinclude „
manycomponentsofaCommunitycharacter.
Nowmorethanever,theeffortsinvolvedincontinuingwiththe
workatCommunitylevel,progressively puttingtheresultsachieved
topracticaluseandincorporating theconclusions innationalprogrammes
callforcooperation betweenMemberStatesandtheCommission andthe
activesupportoftheTransportInfrastructure Committee.