12. 12. 88 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 318/15 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Regulation (EEC) modifying Regulation (EEC) No 
1107/70 on the granting of aids for transport by rail, road and inland waterways (*) 
(88/C 318/06) 
On 11 May 1988 the Council, acting in pursuance of Article 75 of the EEC Treaty, asked 
the Economic and Social Committee for an Opinion on the abovementioned proposal. 
The Committee instructed its section for transport and communications to prepare its work 
on the matter. The section adopted its Opinion on 20 July 1988. The rapporteur was Mr 
Haas. 
The Committee adopted the following Opinion at its 258th plenary session (meeting of 
28 September 1988) by a substantial majority, with 2 abstentions. 
1. Introduction 
1.1. The Committee has issued numerous Opinions 
on combined transport (2). All these Opinions called for 
expansion of this form of transport. 
1.2. In its information report entitled 'Stocktaking 
and Prospects for a Community Rail Policy' (rappor­
teur: Mr Querleux), which it adopted unanimously in 
July 1986, the Committee attached particular import­
ance to combined transport. It drew attention to a 
number of points, including: 
— the high investment cost of the terminals which, as 
they are an integral part of the infrastructure, should 
be met by the regional authorities, and 
— the need for strategic decisions in respect of this 
form of transport to be taken by the railways in the 
light of the establishment of the single internal 
market by the end of 1992. 
1.3. In its Own-initiative Opinion of 23 March 1988 
on EC transit traffic through non-EC countries—an 
Opinion which was adopted unanimously—the Com­
mittee drew attention to the considerable development 
potential of combined transport in transit traffic. It also 
called upon the railway companies concerned to adopt 
a more positive approach to this field (3). 
1.4. In its Opinion endorsing the proposal to amend 
Regulation (CEE) No 1107/70 (Opinion of 23 Septem­
ber 1981), which is now to be the subject of further 
amendment, the Committee highlighted the importance 
of the various forms of combined transport to the 
economy in general and the transport industry in par­
ticular (in respect of energy-saving and environmental 
protection, helping to reduce the traffic flow on the 
overloaded roads, improved road transport safety, 
reduced transshipment costs, etc.). 
(*) OJNoC 113,29.4. 1988, p. 10. 
(2) Opinion of 23 September 1981 (OJ No C 310, 30. 11. 1981, 
p. 18); Opinion of 30 October 1985 (OJ No C 330 of 
20. 12. 1985, p. 5); Opinion of 23 November 1983 (OJ No 
C 23 of 30. 1. 1984, p. 3); Opinion of 24 November 1983 
(OJ No C 23 of 30. 1. 1984, p. 49). 
(3) OJ No C 134, 24. 5. 1988, p. 19. 2. Comments on the appended report by the Com­
mission on the granting of aids for combined trans­
port 
2.1. It emerges from the report that various Member 
States have made use of Article 3 (1) (e) of Regulation 
(CEE) No 1107/70 to provide financial aid towards the 
cost of infrastructure and transshipment installations; 
the action taken by the Member States does, however, 
vary considerably, not least with regard to the extent 
of the measures taken. There are also some Member 
States which have so far not availed themselves of the 
possibilities being offered. One Member State has made 
payments on the basis of Regulation (CEE) No 
1191/69. The Commission does not exclude the possi­
bility that similar action has also been taken by other 
Member States, for instance by making up railway 
deficits. 
2.2. The report also illustrates the various possi­
bilities available under EC law for intervention with 
respect to combined transport. The Commission also 
refers to this in point 3 of the explanatory memorandum 
preceding the draft Regulation. 
2.3. The two preceding observations demonstrate 
the complete lack of an overall EC plan. In this impor­
tant field for the single internal market we are still a 
long way away in practice from having joint objectives 
and consequently far from achieving a common trans­
port policy. 
2.4. The Committee regrets this situation. Combined 
transport is capable of development and, more 
especially, it makes good sense in many cases for the 
reasons set out in point 1.4 above. In pursuance of 
transport policy objectives it should therefore be further 
developed in a purposeful way. 
2.5. The role played by the advisory committee 
provided for under Article 6 of Regulation (CEE) 
No 1107/70 in the action so far undertaken is not clear 
from the report. 
3. Opinion on the draft Regulation 
3.1. General comments 
In spite of the progress made in combined transport in 
recent years the initial phase of introducing this tech-
No C 318/16 Official Journal of the European Communities 12. 12. 88 
nique has not been completed throughout the EC. This 
is for instance the case in the new Member States, where 
the necessary infrastructure for combined transport is 
less extensively developed. The Commission thus pro­
poses, on the one hand, that the current aid provisions 
be extended until the end of 1992 and, on the other 
hand, that the provisions be broadened so as to author­
ize the granting of financial aid by the Member States, 
in particular cases, towards the operating costs of com­
bined transport. 
3.1.1. As a result of increased traffic density and 
heightened awareness of the environment and the need 
to save energy, the original objectives are if anything 
even more valid than they were in the past. The Com­
mittee therefore once again confirms its fundamental 
endorsement of the further development of combined 
transport and approves the draft Regulation, subject to 
the following basic comments. 
3.1.2. The reason for extending the possibility of 
providing aid for infrastructure and transshipment 
installations is clear from the explanatory memor­
andum. 
In this context the Committee would draw attention to 
a proposal which it made in the report referred to in 
point 1.2 above. It proposed that consideration be given 
to whether transshipment installations may not be 
regarded as forming part of the infrastructure to be 
provided and financed by the public authorities, 
especially bearing in mind that though terminals pro­
vide for the transshipment from one mode of transport 
to another, the necessary financial investment is largely 
met by only one of the modes of transport. 
3.1.3. The extension of the aid provisions to 
encompass the payment of grants in respect of operating 
costs in particular cases can be justified by the fact that 
this would enable all modes of transport to benefit in 
the same way. 
The proposed extension of the aid facilities would 
also be beneficial as it would make it possible to give 
financial aid to the cost of trials of modern techniques 
which would promote the further development of com­
bined transport (1). 
The Committee would, however, draw attention to the 
fact that aid towards operating costs must only be 
granted in accordance with the underlying purpose of 
the Regulation; it must not create distortions in trans­
port or other areas of the common market (2). 
3.1.4. In spite of these basically favourable views, 
the Committee, given the different courses of action 
(*) An example of such a new technique is the 'semi-rail' (hori­
zontal transshipment technique without the use of a crane) 
and mention could also be made of the problem of transship­
ping 53-foot containers carried by sea. With a view to the 
establishment of the single internal market the aim of such 
aids should be to promote the use of uniform techniques of 
benefit to transfrontier transport. 
(2) See Article 2 of Regulation (CEE) No 1107/70 and Article 92 
of the EEC Treaty. being taken by the individual Member States (see point 
2 above), is unable to see how the situation can change 
enough by 1991 to enable the Commission to issue a 
definitive Opinion. The transport undertakings con­
cerned will only operate those forms of transport which 
are in their economic interests. We must therefore in 
all probability reckon with the fact that the conflict 
between political objectives and the business require­
ments of the companies concerned will continue to exist 
even beyond 1991. 
3.1.5. In the Committee's view the intervening period 
should therefore be put to good effect by formulating 
strategies for economically beneficial cooperation 
between the transport undertakings concerned, whilst 
safeguarding their interests. 
With this aim in view, there is a need for practical 
consideration and investigations to determine criteria 
for assessing the extent to which particular forms of 
combined transport (e.g. whole vehicle combinations 
transported by rail, international combined goods 
transport) are to be utilized more intensively with a 
view to achieving economically desirable objectives. In 
cases where transport operations meeting the 
abovementioned criteria are established at the request 
of the public authorities, the authority concerned 
should make the requisite compensatory payment in 
accordance with the principle of special payments set 
out in Regulation (CEE) No 1191/69. 
3.1.6. The Committee has been informed of the 
intention of the Commission to consider these issues, 
as part of a market study of combined transport infra­
structure, and, where appropriate, to formulate ideas 
on the establishment of such criteria. The Committee 
welcomes this development. It is urgently necessary 
that no time be lost in carrying out this work. The 
Committee reserves the right to give its views on the 
findings of this study at the appropriate time. 
3.1.7. In the Committee's view the aim should be 
to evolve, after an extended trial period, a common 
transport approach, based on an overall strategy and 
backed up by corresponding strategies for the transport 
undertakings involved. 
The aim of the investigations and the overall strategy 
should be to promote the development in the single 
internal market of rapid, long-distance combined trans­
port, including transport through areas presenting geo­
graphical problems (e.g. the Alps). 
The overall strategy should be comprehensive. Aids 
should only be one aspect. There is also a need to take 
account of considerations such as the techniques to be 
employed, the various clearance gauges used and the 
question of tariffs. 
The various modes of transport involved must partici­
pate in this appraisal. As far as the railways are con­
cerned, the Committee draws attention to the rec-
12. 12. 88 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 318/17 
ommendation made by the Council on 19 December 
1984 to the national railway companies in the Member 
States calling for greater cooperation in international 
passenger and freight transport (*) and to its own 
Opinions on this subject (2). 
As regards the possible need for financial support, 
consideration should be given to the possibility of pro­
viding EC funding [e.g. money from the European 
Regional Development Fund (ERDF)] to assist trans­
frontier transport. 
(J) See OJ No L 333, 21. 12. 1984, p. 63. 
(2) Cf. especially the Opinion on the draft Council Recommen­
dation on railway tariffs for international transport by con­
tainer and piggy-back techniques (OJ No C 23, 30. 1. 1984, 
p. 3). 
Done at Brussels, 28 September 1988. 
1. The Committee welcomes the fact that the Com­
mission has been successful in bringing about the initial­
ling of an agreement with the majority of the relevant 
third countries which will extend the Community com­
bined goods transport regime to traffic between the 
Community and these countries. This agreement, which r 3.2. Specific comments 
r 
1 3.2.1. In order to be more specific the second indent 
i of the first paragraph of Article 1 should be amended 
to read as follows: 
'... or to the costs of operating the combined trans-
> port, on condition that the traffic flow is thereby 
reduced on routes or parts of routes where the road 
1 infrastructures are over used, highly polluted or 
present particular problems.' 
The Committee considers that the granting of aid in 
respect of operating costs should be subject to the 
approval of the Commission. 
3.2.2. The Committee calls for a reconsideration of 
the timetable set out by the Commission. 
3.2.3. The Committee also proposes that the joint 
, committees on road and rail transport established by 
the Commission be involved in the discussions. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alfons MARGOT 
gives combined transport the encouragement that the 
Committee has always advocated, creates the basic 
political conditions for facilitating combined goods 
transport between the Community and third countries, 
even though not all commercial and technical aspects 
have been covered. Opinion on the proposal for a Council Decision on the conclusion of the agreement between 
the European Economic Community, Finland, Norway, Switzerland, Sweden and Yugoslavia 
on the international combined road/rail carriage of goods (ATC) 
(88/C 318/07) 
On 19 September 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 20 July 1988. The rapporteur was 
Mr Haas. 
At its 258th plenary session (meeting of 28 September 1988) the Economic and Social Comittee 
unanimously adopted the following Opinion.