Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the 'Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Committee of the Regions and the Economic and Social Committee - Developing the Citizens' Network - Why good local and regional passenger transport is important, and how the European Commission is helping to bring it about'
Date: 1999-03-24
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: carriage of passengers, principle of subsidiarity, regional policy, transport policy

18.5.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 138/7

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Communication from the Commission
to the Council, the European Parliament, the Committee of the Regions and the Economic and
Social Committee — Developing the Citizens’ Network — Why good local and regional passenger
transport is important, and how the European Commission is helping to bring it about’

(1999/C 138/03)

in
On 13 July 1998 the Commission asked the Economic and Social Committee for an opinion,
pursuance of Article 198 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned
communication.

The Section for Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society, which was instructed to
prepare the Committee’s work on the matter, adopted its opinion on 9 March 1999. The rapporteur was
Mr von Schwerin.

The Committee adopted the opinion set out below at its 362nd plenary session held on 24 and 25 March
1999 (meeting of 24 March), with 89 votes in favour and three abstentions.

1. Summary — general observations

1.1.
The Committee welcomes the fact that, by submitting
the present communication, the Commission reinforces the
importance of the Green Paper on the Citizens’ Network and
thereby helps to bring about the further development of public
passenger transport and boost the scope for intermodal links.

In its Executive Summary (page 2) the Commission lists a
number of subjects to be dealt with in the work programme,
in particular:

— stimulating information exchange,

— promoting benchmarking,

— the establishment of the right policy framework,

— the use of Community financial instruments, and

— endorse the application of the subsidiarity principle.

1.2.
The Committee would, however, point out that the
term ‘the citizens’ network’ has not yet become an established
concept to large sections of the population and a number of
experts. More action needs to be taken in this respect.

The Committee hopes that the Commission will take
1.3.
concrete steps towards the creation of such a citizens’ network.
With this aim in view, there is a need to set out qualitative and
quantitative objectives (such as changing the modal split),
backed up by practical action which may be taken to achieve
these objections.

1.4. When such action is carried out, however, account
should be taken of the fact that,
in accordance with the
subsidiarity principle, public regional and local passenger
transport is primarily the responsibility of regional and local
authorities and comes under the legal responsibility of the
Member States. The Commission should declare its unequivo-
cal support for the subsidiarity principle also in respect of
regulatory policy, rather than continuing to use the term
‘mainly’. It should continue to be possible for the competent
local authorities to take decisions on matters such as the type

of organization or qualitative and quantitative requirements to
be met by operators, acting in the light of local requirements.

1.5.
The special requirements relating to local responsibility
and an insight into the interests of transport users, reliability,
punctuality, etc. in the field of public passenger transport at
local level continue to justify the ban on cabotage operations
in this field. Operators of public local and regional transport
also have to be resident in the region concerned.

1.6.
The projects in the fields of information, research and
cooperation launched by the EU Commission are furthering
the development of a citizens’ network. The Committee
attaches particular importance in this context to the develop-
ment of quality criteria and projects such as benchmarking in
respect of transport systems.

The projects should therefore focus, in particular, on qualitative
criteria in respect of the provision of services, in addition to
economic criteria, and also consider the interaction between
the various transport modes. Other means of promoting public
mobility, such as systems of cycle-paths or car-sharing, should
also be covered. With these aims in view, all forms of mobility
which are not damaging to the environment should be
coordinated and assisted as part of an environmental alliance.

1.7.
The Communication therefore rightly highlights the
importance of interlinking the various means of transport
which are on offer. Effective mobility management should be
linked to consultations on mobility; parties such as user-groups
and the social partners, should be involved in decision-making
here.

1.8.
Too little attention is, however, paid in the Com-
mission’s communication to the possibilities as regards urban
planning (1), opened up by the organization of transport, and
the complex nature of this issue. The same criticism could
be levelled as regards spatial planning: mobility and equal
opportunities for people living in rural areas should be
improved by promoting local public transport, rather than by
relying exclusively on private cars.

(1) See the communication from the Commission to the Council, the
European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and
the Committee of the Regions on sustainable urban development
in the European Union: a framework for action.

C 138/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

18.5.1999

1.9.
The provision of an adequate measure of local public
transport is a public service requirement. In the case of local
public transport, the goal of promoting competition — which
is broadly endorsed — must continue to be subordinated to
the prime objective of providing essential public services.

The Committee would point out that, under the
1.10.
subsidiarity principle, the right of local authorities themselves
to provide such essential public services in the transport sector
must not be restricted by EU provisions.

including,

1.11.
In cases where exclusive rights in respect of local
public passenger transport are allocated on the basis of tenders,
the local authorities should — with due regard to the planned
liberalization drive — be entitled to apply criteria to the tender
procedure which are in line with local needs and which
may, perhaps, also include acceptance of particular tasks
or commitments,
in particular, transport policy,
environmental, economic and social considerations and a
responsible employment policy. The intention here is to
prevent competition for transport services being based solely
on the cost factor, which would also have a detrimental effect
on the integration of transport supply. It must also be possible
for quality standards to be included amongst the criteria for
awarding contracts. In cases where transport services provided
by private operators take the form of essential public services,
it must, however, also be possible to set conditions relating to
the social obligations of operators.

Public and private transport undertakings should be placed on
an equal footing for the purposes of the provisions governing
essential public services and the granting of exclusive rights.

2. Specific comments

2.1.

Introduction

In its communication the Commission underlines
2.1.1.
the importance of transport as a means of achieving the goal
of sustainable development. The Committee also expressly
endorses the description in Agenda 2000 of the importance of
good, sustainable local and regional passenger transport —
particularly also with a view to avoiding social discrimination
and promoting the quality of life in rural areas.

The Committee endorses the views expressed in the
2.1.2.
communication concerning practical methods for organizing
transport systems in a more sustainable way and for reducing
excessive dependence on private cars. The Committee draws
attention,
in particular, to the fact that the creation of a
‘door-to-door’ transport system for the public represents a
major challenge. Towns, cities and regions have a particularly
important role to play in the establishment of such a network.

2.1.3.
If we are to take up and put to good effect the
‘Challenges and opportunities for change’, the Committee
would once again propose — as it did in its Opinion on the
the Commission
Citizens’ Network Green Paper — that
organize a series of events throughout the EU on the subject
of
the Citizens’ Network. These events which should be
underpinned by the Commission’s administrative and financial
resources should focus in particular on improving the situation
in rural areas and promoting the interests of people with
reduced mobility. The reference to centrally-organized events
on the Citizens’ Network falls short of what is required.

The Commission should pay special attention to the
2.1.4.
integration of transport services. With this aim in view, the
establishment of transport associations, providing coordinated
services and user-friendly and clear prices and operating
systems should be promoted by following best practice.

3. The work programme

3.1. Stimulating information exchange

The Committee supports the promotion of infor-
3.1.1.
mation exchange; this provides an important basis for the
further development of local and regional transport. The
demonstrable demand for such information clearly indicates
the need for action to be taken in this field as a matter of
urgency.

3.1.2.
The Committee welcomes the establishment of the
European Local Transport Information Service (ELTIS), set up
with the help of the POLIS network of cities and regions and
the International Union of Public Transport
(UITP). The
Committee supports the Commission’s intention to include in
this service more information on other public transport
possibilities, such as cycling and car-sharing, in addition to
information on public local and regional passenger transport.

Round-table discussions and international specialist
3.1.3.
conferences are,
in the Committee’s view, good back-up
measures for helping to achieve the objectives being pursued.
The Committee welcomes the further development of net-
works for exchanging information on EU policy and pro-
grammes. Attention should be paid in this context to the
particular problems facing regions situated at the periphery of
the EU, such as the Mediterranean region.

3.1.4.
The Committee welcomes the special attention paid
by the Commission to the situation in the CEEC and the Baltic
states. It is particularly necessary for these countries to be
included in the information-exchange arrangements in view of
the fact that the promotion of local public transport and the
linking of these countries into regional and long-distance
transport services is of key importance to their development.
In this context the specific problems facing these states and
the need to stipulate adequate transitional periods should be
taken into account.

The European cycling associations provide an exam-
3.1.5.
ple of a field in which progress has been made in bringing
together key actors.

18.5.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 138/9

3.2. Benchmarking to improve transport systems

The Committee regards EU-wide benchmarking as
3.2.1.
an interesting tool for comparing the performance of local
transport systems in given areas with good practice elsewhere.
This instrument will therefore provide important help to
the authorities and transport undertakings responsible for
providing local and regional passenger transport when they
have to take decisions. Special consideration should be given
in this respect to qualitative aspects of the provision of services,
the networking of transport supplies (door-to-door service)
and complementary services (cycle-hire, etc.). The Committee
therefore eagerly awaits the results of a pilot benchmarking
project for local transport systems being conducted jointly by
the Commission and the Council of European Municipalities
and Regions (CEMR).

The Committee emphatically shares

3.2.2.
the Com-
mission’s view that external factors, such as land-use planning
and traffic management, need to be taken into account when
assessing the performance of transport operators.

3.2.3.
The Committee keenly awaits the presentation of the
self-assessment system announced by the Commission and the
quality criteria produced by the QUATTRO research projects.
The Committee points out in this context that account has to
be taken, also in accordance with Article 117 of the EC
Treaty, of considerations relating to working conditions when
providing services. Such aspects may include, for example,
measures to ensure that staff are fit to drive and measures to
improve the professional skills of drivers.

3.2.4.
The European Committee of Standardization (CEN)
can make a valuable contribution to the establishment of
the quality criteria for
standard definitions in respect of
passenger transport.

The Committee welcomes

3.2.5.
the Commission’s
announcement that it is to make available a handbook on
benchmarking public transport and other information. It does,
however, point out that such information is intended to help
local authorities and transport operators responsible for
providing transport. These instruments should therefore be
made available to these parties. As it already pointed out in its
Opinion on the Green Paper on the Citizens’ Network (1), the
Committee regards the awarding of quality labels and/or
prizes as a measure which will provide a real stimulus for
quality-based competition.

3.2.6.
Under the Commission’s benchmarking project, the
marketing aspect should be further developed with a view
to tabling special marketing recommendations designed to
stimulate demand.

3.3. Establishing the right policy framework

3.3.1.
The Committee welcomes the Commission’s inten-
tion to review how to encourage the adoption of good practice
in transport aspects of land-use planning.

3.3.2.
An increasing number of employers and under-
takings are formulating plans for encouraging their staff and
visitors to adopt sustainable patterns of transport behaviour.
The Committee welcomes this development which is, however,
only at an initial stage.

3.3.3.
One way of promoting this development would be
to involve the social partners and user-groups more closely in
the planning of the supply of local transport. The Committee
advocates the organization of a regional social dialogue on
integrated local transport policy at both local and regional
levels; such a dialogue should involve not only transport
undertakings, business associations, trade unions, environmen-
tal and transport-user associations but also individual passen-
ger and car-drivers.

3.3.4.
The Committee attaches considerable importance in
particular to active mobility management as a means of
resolving transport problems. With this aim in view, local
means of transport should be linked; steps should also be
taken to integrate these means of transport, inter alia in a way
in which is readily recognizable to the public. This task would
be particularly facilitated if members of the public had to deal
with only one body (or a small number of bodies) (single
management body).
In this context mobility management
should be extended to include mobility consultation.

3.3.5. F a i r a n d e f f i c i e n t t r a n s p o r t p r i c i n g

3.3.5.1.
In many EU Member States the current price
structure for the various means of transport encourages people
to use cars. One reason for this is that car-users in these States
are not billed for external costs.

3.3.5.2.
The Green Paper on Fair and Efficient Pricing in
Transport (2) addresses the subject of internalizing the external
costs of transport; the Committee generally endorses this
concept.

3.3.5.3.
The Committee does, however, regard the general
introduction of road pricing in urban areas as problematic
because of (a) the high level of local opposition to this idea, (b)
the attendant administrative costs, and (c) the danger that
traffic will be transferred away from central urban areas to
outside areas, thereby jeopardizing the viability of inner-city
areas. Rather than levying charges on traffic flows into urban
areas, the levying of charges on stationary traffic (management
of parking areas) should be extended; Park and Ride schemes
could also be introduced in this context. The research projects
currently being carried out in this connection are expected to
provide valuable indications for further debate.

3.3.6. T r a n s p o r t t e l e m a t i c s

telematics.

The Committee shares the view that transport
3.3.6.1.
services can be made more efficient and quality can be
increased by using transport
is, however,
important that such measures are not used solely to optimize
the management of private transport but are rather a network
information concerning public
of other information, e.g.
transport routes and timetables. Greater use should also be
made of telematics in regional and local public transport.
Otherwise there is a risk that telematics will be used primarily
as an instrument for promoting private transport.

It

(1) OJ C 212, 22.7.1996, p. 77.

(2) OJ C 56, 24.2.1997, p. 31.

C 138/10

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

18.5.1999

3.3.6.2.
The development of electronic payment and ticket-
ing systems may also help to improve the accessibility of
public transport
systems and thereby promote ‘modal-
splits’ (1).

3.3.6.3.
The Committee attaches particular importance to
the use of telematics in the field of traffic control involving
priority for public transport vehicles at traffic lights. Such
measures not only help to speed up the flow of public
transport vehicles, thereby making it more attractive for the
public to use these services, but also facilitate the more
effective use of resources in public passenger transport; such
services can therefore be provided more cheaply and offered
at lower prices.

The Committee welcomes measures to establish
3.3.6.4.
compatibility between the various systems and to establish
networks of telematics applications with a view to furthering
the goal of providing trans-European services.

3.3.7. V e h i c l e a n d e n v i r o n m e n t a l s t a n d a r d s

3.3.7.1.
The Committee welcomes the proposal to intro-
duce standards in respect of the use of buses in urban transport.
These standards also cover sustainability and accessibility. The
Committee supports the Commission proposals for tighter
emission standards for vehicles, improved quality standards
for fuels and stricter rules on inspection and maintenance
checks (2).

3.3.8. P u b l i c

l o c a l
p o r t

s e r v i c e s

a n d
a n d r e g i o n a l p a s s e n g e r

c o m p e t i t i o n i n
t r a n s -

3.3.8.1.
Public transport has an important role to play in
reducing pollution and promoting economic growth and
social cohesion. The viability of towns and cities is in jeopardy
if they do not have effective public transport facilities. The
transport supply must therefore be greater than the supply
provided by operators on purely commercial grounds. Public
service transport also needs to be provided.

3.3.8.2.
The Committee attaches considerable importance
in this context to the contribution made by local and regional
transport
to promoting integration. Most Member States
provide for the possibility of awarding exclusive rights to
operate particular forms of transport in specified geographical
areas; this provision may help to promote such services. The
Commission recognizes that the benefits of such exclusive
rights — also with regard to promoting investment by
operators — outweigh the possible drawbacks as regards
competition law.

(1) OJ C 66, 3.3.1997, p. 23.
(2) Auto/Oil Programme (COM(96) 248 final).

3.3.8.3.
The Commission also deplores the fact that when
exclusive rights or public service contracts are being awarded
there is no obligation to take account of market forces.
Attention is drawn in this context to the results of the
ISOTOPE study which pointed to the fact that cost savings of
between 10 and 35 % could be achieved through the use of
tendering procedures.

3.3.8.4.
The Committee draws attention to the lack of
observations on the impact of such tendering procedures on
the drive to achieve integration, particularly with regard to
traffic planning and coordination with other transport modes.
In this context
there are indications that some negative
consequences may also occur. The examples quoted in the
ISOTOPE study also clearly demonstrate that local authorities
already pay due regard to cost considerations when organizing
transport networks.

The Commission’s comment that freedom of establishment
has led to ‘cross-border initiatives’ and is now bound to lead
to the development of a common market is not accurate (see
point 2.3.6 of the Commission’s Communication). A more
likely outcome — which has already occurred in some states
— is a trend towards the establishment of oligopolies which
restrict competition. The Committee would prefer to see local
public transport systems controlled at local and regional level
and backed up by corresponding SME-type business structures
established under public or private law. The Committee
endorses the Commission’s intention to insist that provision
be made for reasonable transitional periods for previous
operators when new rules are introduced. The Committee
expressly supports and attaches considerable importance to
the Commission’s endeavours to prevent the establishment of
oligopolies.

3.3.8.5.
The Committee already drew attention in its Opin-
ion on the Citizens’ Network Green Paper to the fact that
competition on grounds of quality and performance is prefer-
able to competition based solely on price. When assessing the
suitability of instruments consideration should also be given
to factors such as trends in passenger revenue, the impact on
moves towards integrating networks and the quality of services,
also with regard to social and physical accessibility.

3.3.8.6.
National laws now give local and regional auth-
orities in many states the opportunity to decide how public
service transport is to be provided at local level. The Committee
draws attention to the fact that in its communication the
Commission fails to explain how EU initiatives on the
establishment of a legal framework for regional and local
transport are to be squared with the above-mentioned right,
thereby respecting the principle of subsidiarity.

3.3.8.7.
Transparent procedures should, in the Committee’s
view, be adopted in cases where public transport services are
put out to tender. It would however stress that it must be
possible for the competent local and regional authorities to
apply criteria other than purely economic criteria to the
tendering procedure. Other criteria which come into question
here are, for example, social criteria or considerations relating
to the quality and reliability of the service or the guaranteed
maintenance of transport infrastructure.

18.5.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 138/11

3.3.9. W o m e n ’ s t r a n s p o r t n e e d s

3.4.2. R e s e a r c h ,

t e c h n o l o g i c a l d e v e l o p m e n t

a n d d e m o n s t r a t i o n p r o j e c t s

3.3.9.1. Women have special transport and safety needs,
for example with regard to the accessibility of public transport
systems; these needs must be taken into account. An adequate
supply of local public transport services needs to be provided
for both women and men — particularly those travelling with
children — and not just in the rush hour and other peak travel
periods. The specific requirements of elderly infirm people,
disabled people, children and young people should, however,
also not be forgotten.

The Committee endorses the projects listed by the Commission
which are of particular relevance to the Citizens’ Network,
namely: ‘Sustainable mobility and intermobility’, ‘Land trans-
‘The city of tomorrow and
port and marine technologies’,
cultural heritage’ and ‘Systems and services for the citizen’.
The measures currently being taken to translate these projects
into action should, in the Committee’s view, be carried forward
without delay.

3.3.10. P e o p l e w i t h r e d u c e d m o b i l i t y

The availability of effective local and regional public transport
systems is particularly necessary for people with reduced
mobility. In the light of the needs of this group of transport-
users minimum standards should be introduced in respect of
the way in which infrastructure is organized (motor vehicles,
bus stops, etc.). The Committee also welcomes the measures
announced by the Commission for facilitating travel by people
with reduced mobility.

3.4. Using the European Union’s financial instruments effectively

Local and regional authorities are responsible for investment
in local and regional transport networks. With a view to
achieving the EU’s objectives in respect of effective links
between trans-European long-distance transport networks and
local and regional transport networks, the EU should help to
optimize the effectiveness of local and regional transport
networks.

The Commission should instigate a special investment pro-
gramme for the joint financing of interconnections with a view
to promoting intermodality and links with the trans-European
transport network (TEN-T). This programme would also boost
short- and medium-term employment policy since the projects
have already been prepared by local transport enterprises and
they could be implemented rapidly.

3.4.1. T h e

t r a n s - E u r o p e a n

t r a n s p o r t

n e t -

w o r k

3.4.3. R e g i o n a l d e v e l o p m e n t a n d t h e S t r u c -

t u r a l F u n d s

The Committee endorses the revision of the eligibility criteria
and evaluation systems for the Structural Funds being planned
by the Commission as part of Agenda 2000.

The establishment and further development of local public
transport infrastructure in rural areas should be covered by the
financing funds (stopping areas, interchanges, control centres,
vehicles).

3.4.4.

I n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t E U f u n d i n g

Sustainable local and regional passenger transport helps pro-
mote the objectives of a number of EU programmes. These
programmes include the trans-European transport network,
the Structural Funds, R and TD programmes in the fields of
transport policy,
telematics applications
and energy, Phare, Tacis,
Ispra, LIFE, SAVE and the loan
programmes of the European Investment Bank.

transport means,

The Committee supports the Commission’s intention to issue
a guide explaining how the abovementioned programmes can
promote local and regional transport. The guide should also
outline the key criteria and procedures for awarding financial
aid under the respective programmes.

4. Final observation

The Committee highlights the importance of
the trans-
European transport network (TEN-T) and encourages the
Commission to revise the guidelines in this respect with a view
to stimulating participation by territorial authorities and
transport undertakings and providing for joint financing by
the Commission, as called for in point 3.4 above.

4.1.
The Committee would reiterate its proposal that com-
petition and market regulation issues be addressed in a
separate green paper which would deal
in detail with the
abovementioned links.

C 138/12

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

18.5.1999

The 1998 NEA Opinion and the hearing organized by the
Commission in Brussels on 29 June 1998 did not provide an
adequate basis as a number of key questions were not properly
resolved; these include: is absolute priority to be given to the
subsidiarity principle; is local public transport to be included
in the internal market (Article 3(c) of the EC Treaty); is local
public transport to be covered by the EC Treaty articles

governing transport policy (Articles 74 et seq.); what account
has to be taken of Articles 90 (public undertakings) and 92
(state aid) of the EC Treaty.

It

4.2.
is suggested that a qualitative and quantitative
monitoring system be set up for the political implementation
of the work programme.

Brussels, 24 March 1999.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Beatrice RANGONI MACHIAVELLI

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Council Directive on port
reception facilities for ship-generated waste and cargo residues’ (1)

(1999/C 138/04)

On 31 July 1998 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under Article 84(2)
of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned proposal.

The Section for Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society, which was responsible for
preparing the Committee’s work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 9 March 1999. The rapporteur
was Mr Chagas.

At its 362nd plenary session (meeting of 24 March 1999), the Economic and Social Committee adopted
the following opinion with 91 votes in favour and three abstentions.

1.

Introduction

The Marpol Convention, which was adopted by the
1.1.
International Maritime Organization (IMO)
in 1973 and
supplemented by Protocols in 1978 and 1997, was the first
international convention to establish guidelines for preventing
pollution caused by ships. It has been amended on a number
of occasions with a view to updating and strengthening its
provisions.

1.2. Marpol 73/78 contains a set of rules and provisions
for preventing pollution of the marine environment by oil
(Annex I); for the control of pollution by noxious liquid
substances carried in bulk (Annex II); for preventing pollution
by harmful substances carried in packaged form or in con-
tainers or tanks (Annex III); for preventing pollution by sewage
(Annex IV) and garbage (Annex V); and for the prevention of
air pollution by ships (Annex VI) (2).

1.3. Marpol 73/78 was the first instrument to oblige all
ships — rather than just oil tankers — to be fitted with
segregated oil tanks. It also introduced the concept of ‘special
areas’. These areas are considered so vulnerable that oil

(1) OJ C 271, 31.8.1998, p. 79.
(2) Annexes IV and VI have not yet entered into force.

discharges are completely prohibited. The main special areas
are the Mediterranean Sea, the Baltic Sea, the Black Sea, the
Red Sea and the Antarctic.

1.4. Marpol 73/78 requires the contracting parties to ensure
the provision of adequate port facilities for reception of the
various types of substance classified in the five annexes and, in
particular, discharges of oil (Annex I), noxious liquid sub-
stances (Annex II) and garbage (Annex V).

1.5.
The convention seeks to strike a balance between the
need to protect the marine environment and the wish not to
impose obligations which would make shipping activities
unduly costly.

1.6. Marpol 73/78 also seeks to strike an environmental
balance between the interests of the flag states and those of
the maritime states in which the ships operate, by establishing
rights and obligations for all these states and laying down
operational requirements for ships. Flag states have tradition-
ally claimed sole jurisdiction over their vessels, while maritime
states feel that they should be granted the authority to ensure
that the convention is respected by all vessels which operate
along their coasts.