WRITTEN QUESTION P-2527/00 by Luciano Caveri (ELDR) to the Commission. Mont Blanc tunnel.
Date: 2000-07-25
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Switzerland, Valle d'Aosta, eligibility criteria, rail network, trans-European network

C 103 E/174

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.4.2001

(2001/C 103 E/199)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2527/00

by Luciano Caveri (ELDR) to the Commission

(25 July 2000)

Subject: Mont Blanc tunnel

The tunnel between Italy and France has been closed to traffic since 24 March 1999 because of a tragic
fire inside the Mont Blanc tunnel which had fatal consequences.

According to the latest reports, March 2001 is the scheduled date for the completion of work necessary to
reopen the tunnel at new safety standards, in order to prevent the repetition of accidents of such a serious
nature.

This route, together with the planned completion of the motorway under construction on the Italian side
of the mountain, is already included in the trans-European road transport network, and this underlines its
importance for crossing the Alps.

With a view to the reopening of the tunnel, and on the basis of a wider debate on excessive road transport
in the Alpine region which the tragic results of the Mont Blanc tunnel fire have made more heated, there
are two schools of thought: the first aims at a total ban on TIR vehicles in the tunnel, and the second
proposes a strict vehicle numbers quota.

In addition, on the initiative of the autonomous region of the Valle d(cid:146)Aosta and the canton of Valais, the
projected rail crossing between Aosta and Martigny with a rail route from Milan has been relaunched.
Mention is also made of it in the annex to Italy(cid:146)s Financial Law for 2000. This route is not yet in the
European priorities that have already been established.

Could the Commission therefore say whether the Aosta-Martigny rail crossing, with connecting rail routes,
will be included in future documents on the trans-European rail transport network?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(12 September 2000)

According to the information in the Commission(cid:146)s possession there is indeed a project involving a new
railway line between Aosta and Martigny.

This project does not relate to any of the links identified in the railway network maps set out in Decision
No 1692/96 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 July 1996 on Community guidelines for
the development of the trans-European transport network (1). As part of examining the suitability of
revising those guidelines which the Commission is in the process of doing, it has emerged that it is for the
moment not justified to add any new link as contained in this project.

Indeed, the national authorities have not made any request concerning any such addition. In addition,
following agreement between the Community and the Swiss Confederation on the carriage of goods and
passengers by rail and by road, those authorities must work in concert in order to produce the railway
infrastructures in a coordinated manner. Including the new line to Switzerland in the trans-European
network maps would thus require consultation of the Swiss authorities. However, the latter, too, have not
expressed any interest themselves in this project.

If, however, a request were lodged by the national authorities and by the Swiss authorities via the joint
committee set up under the abovementioned agreement, the Commission would examine that request with
all due attention.

However, the Commission would again point out that decisions concerning the alpine infrastructure
should be subjected to an overall analysis and that that analysis should take account of the existence, in the
guidelines in force as regards the expansion of the trans-European network, of major railway projects
already being investigated or worked upon, and more particularly the projects adopted by the Essen
European Council, namely the Lyon-Torino route and the Verona-M(cid:252)nchen link via the Brenner.

(1) OJ L 228, 9.9.1996.