Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the 'Proposal for a Council Directive on a transparent system of harmonised rules for driving restrictions on heavy goods vehicles involved in international transport on designated roads'
Date: 1999-09-16
Institutions: European Committee of the Regions
Subjects: administrative transparency, approximation of laws, commercial vehicle, international transport, road traffic, traffic regulations

23.12.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 374/85

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the ‘Proposal for a Council Directive on a
transparent system of harmonised rules for driving restrictions on heavy goods vehicles involved
in international transport on designated roads’

(1999/C 374/19)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

having regard to the list of Commission proposals pending on 1 May 1999 for which the entry into force
of the Treaty of Amsterdam involves a change in the legal basis and/or procedure (SEC(1999) 581 final);

having regard to the Proposal for a Council Directive on a transparent system of harmonised rules for
driving restrictions on heavy goods vehicles involved in international transport on designated roads
(COM(1998) 115 final — 98/0096 COD ex SYN) (1);

having regard to the decision taken by the Council, notified by its letter of 14 June 1999, to consult the
Committee of the Regions, under Articles 265, first paragraph and Article 71 of the Treaty establishing
the European Community, on the above matter;

having regard to its Bureau decision of 15 September 1999 to appoint Mr Weingartner (A, PPE) as
rapporteur-general to draw up the relevant opinion under Rule 39 of the COR Rules of Procedure;

having regard to its Resolution on a European Charter of regional and local authorities for a progressive
and sustainable transport policy (CdR 347/97 fin) (2);

in view of the Economic and Social Committee Opinion of 9 and 10 September 1998 on the Proposal
for a Council Directive on a transparent system of harmonised rules for restrictions on heavy goods
vehicles involved in international transport on designated roads (CES 1135/98),

unanimously adopted the following opinion at its 30th plenary session of 15 and 16 September 1999
(meeting of 16 September).

1.

Introduction

1.1.
The Commission draft directive points out that there
are currently no European rules on transport restrictions for
heavy goods vehicles. Up to now these matters have been
governed by national legislation, which explains the lack of
coordination and the considerable variations.

economic interests clash with the need,
in some Member
States, for an appropriate solution to improving road safety,
reducing traffic density, protecting the environment and taking
account of social considerations in the transport industry.

2. Comments

The draft directive seeks to facilitate intra-Community
1.2.
international road transport of goods by attempting to har-
monise existing driving bans on major roads (the TEN road
network). These driving bans mainly relate to weekends and
public holidays, when 7 out of the 15 Member States currently
operate such restrictions.

The new draft directive, which some Member States
1.3.
have requested from the Commission, deals with an area where

There are no Community rules for this area because
2.1.
responsibility for road traffic management
lies with the
national, and sometimes also with the regional governments,
of the Member States. The European Commission argues that
a Community directive can be adopted because both the
Community and the Member States are jointly responsible for
this area (Article 75 (3) (1) (a)(c)(d) of the EC Treaty). The COR
takes the view that irrespective of this argument, it must be
stressed that adopting this directive will reduce national
responsibilities (and in many Member States regional responsi-
bilities also) and will thus run counter to the subsidiarity
principle.

(1) OJ C 198, 24.6.1998, p. 17.
(2) OJ C 251, 10.8.1998, p. 7.

(3) Art. 71 (Treaty of Amsterdam).

C 374/86

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

23.12.1999

2.2.
It is noteworthy that those Member States which
currently operate driving restrictions — i.e. Germany, France,
Italy, Luxembourg, Austria and Portugal — are traditionally
holiday countries with heavy traffic density during peak
periods due to leisure and holiday traffic. Switzerland, a
non-EU country, and a large number of the central and eastern
European countries, which are without exception holiday
destinations, also have such restrictions on goods transport by
road.

international transport accounts for only a small proportion
of overall goods transport by road. However, international
road transport primarily uses the network of major roads (the
TEN road network) and accounts for a very significant
proportion of the traffic on these roads (50 % and over). And
it is exactly the TEN that is affected by the proposed reduction
in driving bans.

2.3. While substantial areas of southern European countries
are only affected by summer holiday traffic, the ever increasing
number of short breaks tends to transfer leisure and holiday
traffic to the spring and autumn months also; as a result the
central European countries and the Alpine countries are also
considerably affected by peak leisure and holiday traffic during
the low season and in winter.

2.8.
Road safety is another factor which must be carefully
researched and documented. There is insufficient evidence to
support the European Commission’s contention that at first
sight it was not clear that heavy goods vehicle (HGV) driving
bans had reduced accidents during these periods.

2.4.
Limiting the weekend driving ban to Sundays, as is
proposed in the draft directive, would cause massive traffic
disruption in all holiday countries on Saturdays, as that day is
still the main arrival and departure days for holidaymakers.
The same also goes for the proposed restriction of the public
holiday driving bans. For this reason, the automobile clubs
ADAC, ACI, FFAC, and O¨ AMTC have issued a joint statement
calling for the existing driving bans for heavy goods vehicles
to be maintained.

2.9.
It can be assumed that an easing of the HGV driving
bans would entail additional international goods transport by
road; traffic relief during the remaining week days could
scarcely be expected and it is therefore difficult to argue that
this measure will improve road safety. It is much more likely
that the additional HGV traffic, combined with existing leisure
and holiday traffic at weekends and on public holidays, will
adversely affect road safety.

2.5.
A key question is whether the proposed harmonisation
of regulations on the driving bans in international goods
transport would alter the ‘modal split’, i.e. the breakdown
between the different modes of
transport. The European
Commission emphasises that there is no evidence to suggest
that the current weekend driving restrictions had shifted goods
transport from road to rail.

2.6.
Nevertheless, goods transport by road can be expected
to increase sharply as a result of the proposed Community
rules extending the permissible time periods for international
goods transport by road during weekends and public holidays.
This undermines the Community’s objective of a consistent
transport policy geared to comprehensive consideration of
environmental aspects, a better distribution of
transport
between the different modes of transport, increased use of
environment-friendly modes of transport and shifting goods
transport by road over to rail and shipping. International
transport involves travel over longer distances and is therefore
best suited to a shift towards other modes of transport.

2.7.
The argument that extending time periods for inter-
national transport of goods by road is of little consequence as
it accounts for only a small percentage of overall goods
transport by road, is not completely accurate. It is true that

2.10.
Also significant are the environmental protection
issues linked to expanding international HGV traffic. In this
respect, the priority is to critically assess the problem of air
pollution. i.e. the increased emissions of harmful substances.
Irrespective of whether easing restrictions on Saturdays could
reduce HGV traffic on the other days of the week, it must be
expected that there would be considerably higher congestion
on major roads (the TEN road network) on Saturdays. The
Commission’s explanatory memorandum stresses that in traffic
congestion fuel consumption may be doubled or trebled, with
a concomitant increase in harmful substances emissions. A
decrease in traffic-related air pollution is therefore not on the
cards.

2.11.
At least for sensitive areas like the Alpine region,
there is already evidence that during HGV-free weekends, there
is a dramatic reduction in noxious emissions and that pollution
can therefore be reduced to more tolerable levels, at least for a
short time. Ultimately this is also linked to the fact that
heavy goods vehicles continue to make a disproportionate
contribution to overall levels of traffic related pollutants in the
air. HGV traffic, which constitutes 15-20 % of total traffic,
produces around 50 % of NOx emissions, which are particu-
larly damaging to the environment.

23.12.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 374/87

2.12.
Addressing the consequences of noise emissions, the
Commission itself refers to justifiable restrictions during
night-time hours in the form of driving bans on noisy HGVs
and the consequences under critical geographic conditions,
such as in mountainous regions. The proposal to introduce
driving restrictions on roads where noise pollution poses a
real problem is acceptable, along with the proposal to take
account of noise pollution from all types of vehicles in these
cases. However, the latter measure in particular requires further
research.

2.13.
The Commission’s explanatory memorandum states
that all those countries currently operating driving restrictions
on HGVs provide for exemptions which are by no means
uniform. We endorse the call for strict criteria for establishing
a harmonised list of goods which may also be transported at
weekends and on public holidays. The COR can also support
uniform rules for vehicles to be covered by the exemption
requirements (for example, vehicles which already meet the
highest standard under the EURO classification).

— with goods transport set to grow even more than transport
as a whole — and international goods transport by road, to
which this regulation relates, records the very highest growth
rates. On the other hand, there is a current shift towards a
leisure society, with shorter working hours and more leisure
time. The result is that in addition to an annual holiday, more
and more Community citizens also take short breaks and trips
at weekends and on public holidays. For example, the central
Alpine region currently has only around two months in
the year in late autumn without significant leisure traffic.
Consequently, the combination of expanding leisure traffic
and the additional goods transport on Saturdays is causing
more and more problems from year to year, making coun-
termeasures all the more urgent.

3.3.
There is a need for a fundamental improvement in
research into the links between the above traffic conditions at
weekends and on public holidays and their impact on road
safety and the environment. This also applies to the economic
repercussions at national level, an issue which has not been
adequately addressed to date.

2.14.
Driving bans also of course have a social impact, as
they restrict driving time and impose rest periods. Curtailing
the existing driving bans would put further unreasonable
pressures on people working in road transport.

3.4.
The suggestion in the explanatory memorandum that
in future the aim will be a further limitation of driving bans
seems to be very clearly targeted at the needs of the road
transport industry. A scientifically-based approach, however,
requires a global view.

3. Conclusions and recommendations

Strict criteria should be used to establish a harmonised
3.5.
list of goods which may also be transported at weekends and
on public holidays. It would also make sense to harmonise the
types of vehicles covered by the exemption rules, taking
account of environmental considerations in particular.

3.1.
The COR rejects the draft directive on harmonised
driving bans for HGVs engaged in international goods trans-
port on designated roads, as the arguments for maintaining
the current rules are stronger. Moreover, the fact that easing
the existing driving bans would generate additional HGV traffic
gives fresh unilateral advantages to goods transport by road
and therefore would run completely counter to the EU’s
current aim of skewing transport policy towards better distri-
bution of transport i.e. increasing the share of transport modes
such as rail and shipping.

In order to safeguard the subsidiarity principle, the
3.6.
Committee of the Regions takes the view that national and
regional authorities should retain the same responsibility as
before for road traffic management, since they are best
qualified to assess the need for HGV driving bans. However,
existing or proposed restrictions should be notified to the
European Commission in good time.

The unchecked growth in road transport provides
3.2.
further grounds for rejecting this draft directive. Firstly, all
forecasts point to a further increase in road transport overall

3.7.
Although easing the driving bans may seem justifiable
from the transport industry’s point of view, the considerations
relating to road safety, environmental protection and social
tolerability militate in favour of maintaining the current
provisions. The discussions on the draft directive ultimately

C 374/88

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

23.12.1999

come down to a fundamental choice between values, in which
the Committee of the Regions, in its capacity as representative

of citizens, categorically opts for protecting the interests of the
people affected.

Brussels, 16 September 1999.

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Manfred DAMMEYER