Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the "Transport/Enlargement"
Date: 2002-09-19
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: Community acquis, enlargement of the Union, mode of transport, transport policy

C 61/164

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

14.3.2003

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Transport/Enlargement’

(2003/C 61/26)

On 17 January 2002 the Economic and Social Committee, acting under the third paragraph of Rule 23
of its Rules of Procedure, decided to draw up an own-initiative opinion on the following subject
‘Transport/Enlargement’

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 2 September 2002. The
rapporteur was Mr Kielman.

At its 393rd Plenary Session (meeting of 19 September 2002), the Economic and Social Committee
adopted the following opinion by 40 votes to one with one abstention.

1.

Introduction

The so-called ‘Europe Agreements’ constitute the framework
for bilateral relations between the European Community and
its Member States on the one hand and the applicant countries
on the other. A total of 10 applicant countries signed these
Agreements, while three applicant countries (Turkey, Malta
and Cyprus) signed Association Agreements. The Appendix
lists the countries which have signed Europe Agreements and
Association Agreements. The Europe Agreements can be
regarded as the framework within which the preparations for
becoming a member of the European Union are made. They
are therefore the basis for negotiations with the applicant
countries. Transport is only one of the many subjects covered
by the Community acquis. Other important aspects include
agriculture, the internal market, the environment, safety and
competition. In these fields the acquis has a direct influence on
transport as such, e.g. with regard to the free movement of
goods on the internal market, air quality standards,
the
environment and decision-making on state subsidies and
mergers in the transport field.

2. Transport policy

In the transport sector the applicant countries face the
challenge of transposing and implementing a considerable part
(about 10 percent) of the total acquis legislation. Chapter 9 of
the acquis is based on Articles 70 to 80 of the EU Treaty and
consists mainly of hundreds of regulations, directives and
decisions. For the applicant countries, taking on board the
acquis means not only transposing it into legislation, but
also implementing it in practice. Considerable administrative
organisation and support is needed for this. The transport
acquis has been discussed with 12 applicant countries and
already thoroughly negotiated with 9 of them, but not yet
with Romania, Bulgaria or the Czech Republic. Negotiations
have not yet begun with Turkey as an applicant country.

The road transport sector acquis covers a wide range of social,
technical, fiscal, safety and environmental requirements. The
rail transport acquis has recently been subject to substantial
changes, and the liberalisation of this sector will mean that the
national railway markets will be opened up to competing
railway companies from other Member States. In air transport,
subjects such as market access, safety and infrastructure
organisation will be on the agenda. In the maritime sector one
of the main challenges will be effective implementation of the
maritime safety acquis.

For all transport modes, failure to adopt and apply the acquis
would lead to distortion of competition, which the EESC sees
as unacceptable.

The Committee is also of the view that an increase in the share
of rail and inland waterway transport in the applicant countries
would be desirable, not only on environmental grounds, but
also to alleviate congestion (see also 3.7.1).

Leaving aside the above considerations, in every sector there is
an economic need to bring the transport infrastructure in the
applicant countries up to standard. Yet from the date of
accession the main infrastructure of the applicant countries
will form part of the trans-European network. Community
funds are available for the necessary upgrading. Of course
lessons must be drawn from past experience. In building new
infrastructure or extending existing infrastructure, just as in
transport policy itself, it will be necessary to take account not
just of economic considerations, but particularly of social and
environmental consequences. Since a number of applicant
countries are land-locked, special attention will need to be
given in their case to infrastructure for combined transport.

The current situation is that most of the applicant countries
have almost completed the process of transposing EU legis-
lation into their national legislation. The most important thing
to be done after that is to check whether it will also be
implemented in practice. For this a properly functioning
monitoring system is essential.

14.3.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 61/165

3. Consideration of key issues, broken down by trans-

3.1.3. R a i l t r a n s p o r t

port mode

3.1. Community acquis

3.1.1. R o a d t r a n s p o r t

Implementing the Community acquis will mean that the
applicant countries will have to strengthen the structures of
government bodies and the capacity of those concerned with
this task at government level and in other implementing and
monitoring bodies. These people will also have to be prepared
and trained for the task. In a number of fields, applicant
countries have asked for derogations, mostly in the area of
weights and measures or the application of the credit-worthi-
ness requirement for national transport.

3.1.2.

I n l a n d w a t e r w a y t r a n s p o r t

Inland waterway transport is a relevant policy area for only
some applicant countries: all the Danube countries (Slovakia,
Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria), the Czech Republic, Poland
and to a limited extent Latvia and Lithuania.

There is indeed a fairly complete acquis for inland waterway
transport on the EU’s side, but still dominated by the rules of
the CCR (Central Commission for the Navigation of the Rhine,
to which Switzerland, France, Germany, Belgium and the
Netherlands belong) which adopts them on the basis of the
Revised Rhine Navigation Treaty (Mannheim Act). As a result
of the so-called second additional protocol to that treaty, ships
from the applicant countries at present have limited market
access to the Rhine waterway area: they are not allowed to
ply between Rhine ports. Immediately after accession this
restriction will be automatically lifted, since the second
additional protocol to the Mannheim Act lays down that ships
having a real
link with the EU have access to the Rhine.
Nonetheless, even after accession, separate legislation will
continue to apply on the Rhine to various aspects (e.g. building
and fitting-out of ships, crewing requirements, professional
skills), with which ships from the Member States will still have
to comply in order to gain actual access to the Rhine.

On the other hand, market access to applicant countries for
EU countries is at present still limited by bilateral agreements,
but is expected after accession to be completely free, since no
candidate country has asked for transitional periods on this
point. Nor are any problems expected with regard to the
remaining EU legislation on inland waterway transport. All
applicant countries assume that they can meet the technical
requirements applying to ships. So far only Hungary has
asked for a transitional period for the so-called ‘old-for-new’
arrangements — up to 31 December 2004.

At present the Committee is working on an opinion on
European Commission proposals for the further reform of the
rail sector in the EU. These are known as the rail infrastructure
package. Once accepted, this will become part of the acquis.
In the rail infrastructure package, the following 3 directives are
amended:

— 91/440, to create an organisational division between
transport and infrastructure and to separate the infrastruc-
ture authority from the government;

— 95/18, to make professional authorisations apply to all

rail transport;

— 95/19, to lay down rules for all rail transport on payment

for use/pricing and capacity management.

The most important aspects of the proposed amendments are
opening up the market and separating infrastructure functions
from transport operations. The obligatory organisational sep-
aration of infrastructure functions (including authorisation,
payment for use, capacity management and safety)
from
transport operations is a sine qua non condition for the
applicant countries.

Poland and Hungary, in particular, have indicated that they
have problems with the restructuring and privatisation of the
railways. They have indeed asked for a derogation from
Directive 95/19 with regard to infrastructure capacity allo-
cation and infrastructure charges.

3.1.4. M a r i t i m e t r a n s p o r t

The most important subjects in the maritime sector concern
market access, competition, crewing, and state support, safety
and environment in so far as they influence competitiveness.
It is important to avoid a situation in which EU shipowners
are faced in one of these areas with unfair competition from
the applicant countries. The applicant countries will have to
take on the acquis in all these fields completely and without
transitional periods at the moment of accession. This will not
be a simple task, given the inadequate supervision of the
implementation of the acquis in the applicant countries. In
particular, maritime safety gives cause for concern. In recent
years safety has been high on the agenda. Thus the European
Commission very recently concluded an agreement on a
signalling and information system for maritime traffic. The
system is intended to prevent accidents arising from heavy
traffic along important European routes. The applicant
countries must also adapt themselves to these recent develop-
ments.

C 61/166

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

14.3.2003

3.1.5. A i r t r a n s p o r t

3.3.

Economics

Even before the start of the accession negotiations, discussions
began between the EU and the applicant countries about the
latter’s integration into the internal air transport market.

3.3.1. C o m p e t i t i o n

3.3.1.1. Road transport

The same approach was chosen as for the integration of
Norway and Iceland, namely a multilateral agreement between
the EU and the applicant countries and between the applicant
countries themselves, in which the basic principles were laid
down. In addition there are separate protocols for each country
laying down the derogations from the basic agreements in
each case. These are mainly concerned with transitional
periods for parts of the air transport acquis (all aspects: market
access, safety and environment). Given that this approach
covers all aspects of the air transport acquis, no separate
accession negotiations are necessary in the air transport sector.

3.2. Definitions and statistics

Because this subject applies to all modes of transport equally,
there is no need for a breakdown by mode. The applicant
countries have not asked for any derogations in regard to
Community statistical legislation. However, statistics take a
great deal of time, while there is often a need for recent data
which can be rapidly produced. Therefore the Committee takes
the view that a monitoring system should be set up to observe
the development of the transport market in the EU and provide
decision-makers with relevant, comparable and recent data.

These data will also be needed to answer the question of
whether and to what extent there is a crisis. This means
information on prices, costs, charges, whether in the form of
index figures or not, together with surveys of the current
economic situation in the various transport sectors.

As well as having information available in the short term, the
Committee thinks it necessary for the same terminology and
definitions to be used in the present EU Member States and
the applicant countries. At present this is far from being the
case. For example, a recent survey shows that six applicant
countries use the same definition as the EU countries for ‘own-
transport’. It is therefore very important for the
account
remaining countries to adopt this definition and use it in
practice as soon as possible.

Freedom of establishment exists in the applicant countries, but
a number of them still have a quota system for international
transport. There are no market indicators which measure the
intensity of competition both in the EU and in the applicant
countries. However, the greatly increased competition, which
in the Committee’s view is mainly due to the inadequate
operation of the qualitative criteria for access to the profession
of road haulier, leads to failure to comply with social and
traffic safety rules.

The Committee therefore thinks it very important that training
for the profession of road haulier and driver be raised to a
comparable level to that found in the EU.

As regards cabotage transport, the general feeling is that
immediate liberalisation of the cabotage market at EU level is
undesirable. On a bilateral basis Member States can reach
agreements with the applicant countries on mutual liberalis-
ation. At Community level a start will be made only after some
years (the figure of five years is often mentioned) on a partial,
and later complete, liberalisation of the cabotage market for
most of the applicant countries. For Slovenia, Malta and
Cyprus, the cabotage market will be opened up reciprocally at
the time of accession.

3.3.1.2.

Inland waterway transport

In this sector, as stated above, ships from the applicant
countries still have only limited access to the Rhine waterway
area as a result of the so-called second additional protocol to
the Revised Rhine Navigation Treaty. After accession this
restriction will be lifted and ships from the applicant countries
will have free access, provided that they meet the other EU
criteria.

3.3.1.3. Rail transport

Competition in the rail transport sector is in the Committee’s
view a sensitive area, since the situation in the applicant
countries varies considerably. The starting point is that rail
transport/track use is determined as far as possible by the
market, but that the general conditions and infrastructure
policy are determined by the government. At the same time,
the rail sector will have to be more efficient in order to survive.
However, the Committee would stress that this must never be
done at the expense of operating safety. Experience with
lead
reforms so far suggests that
automatically to more competition. It must always go hand in
hand with technical and economic harmonisation.

liberalisation does not

14.3.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 61/167

3.3.1.4. Maritime transport

Reactions to the ideas contained in the White Paper are as yet
unclear.

Competition in the maritime sector is found particularly in
those areas described in the section on the acquis: market
access, crewing, state aid, safety and environment. For all these
areas there will be no distortion of competition provided
that the acquis is fully adopted and complied with after
implementation in the agreed manner. The situation in Malta
and Cyprus is particularly worrying in view of the size of their
fleets.

3.3.1.5. Air transport

3.3.2.3. Maritime transport

In this sector the existing rules on state aid are currently under
review in order to improve the competitive position of the EU
maritime fleet.

3.3.2.4. Air transport

In the air transport sector the Committee regards it as desirable,
with a view to equal treatment of transport modes, for a start
to be made soon on the discussion of tax issues.

The so-called ‘level playing field’ in air transport — market
access requirements, controls and enforcement — is known,
and has been agreed with the applicant countries, together
with the transitional periods. The Committee thinks it unlikely
that problems will arise in this sector.

3.4.

Social aspects

3.4.1. R o a d t r a n s p o r t

3.3.2. T a x a t i o n

3.3.2.1. Road transport

In this respect the situation in the applicant countries varies. A
number of them have the same system as the EU (motor
vehicle tax, excise duty and a road-user tax or toll).

Other applicant countries use a different system. In the EU the
White Paper on Transport appeared in September 2001,
enshrining the idea that each mode of transport must pay the
total costs to which it gives rise, including external costs. There
will be a framework directive on an infrastructure taxation
system, and a proposal for a uniform excise duty on heavy
goods vehicles. The Committee takes the view that the
principle of each transport mode having to pay for the costs
involved is acceptable, but recommends that a simple system
be adopted so that the applicant countries can soon take part
in it.

Some of the present EU Member States are concerned about
employment
in the transport sector after the applicant
countries’ accession, because wage costs in the applicant
countries are significantly lower. There is a fear that jobs will
be lost.

Moreover, the accession of the applicant countries will mean
that the eastern frontier of the EU will then be that of the
applicant countries. The Committee would point out that this
will have social consequences for the border officials of
Member States currently forming the EU’s external frontier, as
well as for border officials of the applicant countries, who will
acutely feel the impact of enlargement. In the Committee’s
view these consequences are underestimated.

Preparation and training of border officials are needed for the
new external
frontiers, and a social programme must be
established on the lines of that already introduced for Com-
munity citizens.

3.4.2.

I n l a n d w a t e r w a y t r a n s p o r t

The social consequences of enlargement appear at first sight to
be acceptable, both for present EU employees and for
employees in the applicant countries.

3.3.2.2.

Inland waterway transport

3.4.3. R a i l t r a n s p o r t

In the Committee’s view the accession of
the applicant
countries will have little tax impact in the inland waterway
transport sector. As is well known, the ‘Mannheim Act’ forbids
the introduction of charges for the use of the Rhine waterway.

In the Committee’s view it is still too early to make a valid
assessment of the social consequences of enlargement for
railway staff.

C 61/168

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

14.3.2003

3.4.4. M a r i t i m e t r a n s p o r t

3.5.2.

I n l a n d w a t e r w a y t r a n s p o r t

In the maritime sector there is great concern about possible
social dumping once the applicant countries have acceded. In
the Committee’s view seafarers from the applicant countries
should enjoy the same working conditions after accession as
present EU seafarers. However, this is not yet the case, and it
is feared that it will not even apply after accession. As it is
possible for seafarers from outside the EU to be employed on
Community ships and to be paid by the standards of their
country of origin. The Committee regards this as an undesirable
and competition-distorting situation. The consequences can of
course vary from one country to another, but the Committee
thinks it desirable for an EU standard to be developed and laid
down in an EU directive or regulation, so that the legislation
of the country of registration applies.

3.4.5. A i r t r a n s p o r t

No problems are foreseen in this sector.

3.5.

Transport safety

3.5.1. R o a d t r a n s p o r t

Transport safety is, in the Committee’s view, one of the most
important subjects which should be covered in the enlargement
negotiations. All the more so, since data from the CEMT
(European Conference of Ministers of Transport) show that the
transport safety situation has worsened in the applicant
countries in recent years. This is partly a result of the growth
in the number of vehicles in the applicant countries. The
Committee takes the view that legislation, and its implemen-
tation and enforcement, must be tightened up in order to halt
the downward trend. In this connection the Committee points
out that attention must also be paid to improving the attitude
of road-users and the ‘transport culture’
in the applicant
countries. There has been a rapid growth in road traffic as a
result of economic development. In the traffic safety area the
acquis includes the introduction of rules on driving time and
rest periods, the electronic tachograph, the speed-limiter and
in the future the driver’s certificate, all of which will be
compulsory for international vehicles after accession. More-
over, if the White Paper on Transport were transposed into
European rules, the costs resulting from traffic accidents would
have to be included in the transport price. Furthermore, the
Committee wishes to point out that it attaches great import-
ance to a start being made at European level on a systematic
analysis of the causes of traffic accidents.

The traffic safety situation in inland waterway transport is not
likely to change much as a result of enlargement.

3.5.3. R a i l t r a n s p o r t

In view of the fact that the railways transport millions of
people and goods every day, it is of the highest importance to
ensure a high level of traffic safety in the EU, including after
enlargement. For this reason the European Commission, in its
second rail package, proposed a number of accompanying
measures to guarantee this level. The Committee takes the
view that these accompanying measures should be adopted as
quickly as possible.

3.5.4. M a r i t i m e t r a n s p o r t

The Committee believes that maritime safety is a point of
concern affecting virtually all (seafaring) applicant countries.
This relates primarily to the safety requirements for ships as
set down in: mainly international — still
incomplete —
legislation (IMO) which is applicable to all countries and forms
part of the Community acquis, sometimes with even stricter
requirements. Even if the applicant countries themselves have
not asked for transitional periods, attention needs to be given
to this point. Recent accidents with ships from e.g. Cyprus and
Malta have once more revealed the seriousness of this problem.
Within the EU, as a result of these accidents, work has been
done on a further upgrading of the acquis (the so-called ‘Erika
measures’); this threatens to further widen the gap with the
applicant countries if they do not act quickly. The relevant
legislation should therefore be implemented in the applicant
countries as quickly as possible.

3.5.5. A i r t r a n s p o r t

The traffic safety package has been laid down in a separate
protocol which has been agreed between each applicant
country and the EU. Agreements on possible derogations have
been made with each applicant country.

14.3.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 61/169

3.6.

Infrastructure

3.7.

Environment

3.6.1. T h e p r e s e n t s i t u a t i o n

3.7.1. T r a n s p o r t m o d e s

Within the EU a network of transport corridors has been
established (trans-European transport network or TEN-T). To
prepare for the inclusion of the applicant countries in this
network, the European Commission has made an extensive
inventory of the existing and necessary infrastructure in these
countries — the so-called Transport
Infrastructure Needs
Assessment (TINA). The total amount required for this inven-
tory would be about EUR 90 billion. It involves the building
or extension of 18 000 km of roads, 20 000 km of railways,
38 airports, 13 seaports and 49 inland ports. Special attention
needs to be paid to inland waterway infrastructure, since
the relevant Committee opinion (1) showed that on inland
waterway routes the necessary works must be carried out to
enable them to be used to the full within the trans-European
networks. Infrastructure projects of the applicant countries
which are described in the Tina final report can qualify for EU
funding from the ISPA and Phare funds, albeit not
for
100 percent coverage. The applicant countries themselves
must provide the bulk of the funds (there is mention of 90 %).
After accession the applicant countries will come under the
EU rules for TEN-T. These consist of guidelines for the
development of the trans-European transport network and
general rules for the provision of financial assistance. In the
Committee’s view,
in the
guidelines for TEN-T the applicant countries must be provided
with maps showing which infrastructure will come under
TEN-T. The Committee would point out here that the extension
the trans-European networks to include the European
of
islands (2) should in future also apply to the applicant countries.
A further point to bear in mind is that in the projects to
develop the TEN-T the Member States should also meet
environmental conditions (Habitat Directive).

these rules should be revised:

Emission standards and fuel quality come under this heading.
Under the EU standards the emission of NOx etc. has been
reasonably stabilised. The growth of the internal market has
led to a sharp increase in goods transported by road. In
particular, the aim of reducing CO2 emissions cannot be
achieved. In order to limit the damage as much as possible, it
is important to create a ‘clean vehicle fleet’ in the applicant
countries as soon as possible. Moreover, it will be very difficult
to reduce traffic noise and the number of traffic accident
victims.

For this reason, but also because of the likely road congestion,
the Committee thinks it necessary for energetic efforts to be
made to develop the infrastructure of other transport modes
and adopt a market-oriented approach to these modes.
Calculating the total cost for each transport mode could in the
Committee’s view speed up this process.

It should of course be assumed that the EU provisions of
Natura 2000 and the Fauna/Flora/Habitat Directive will be
respected in the planning and construction of infrastructure in
the applicant countries. In addition to the need for a strategic
environmental
infrastructure pro-
grammes, it is clear that citizens, and nature conservation and
environmental movements, need to be involved at an early
stage.

impact assessment

for

Finally, the Committee thinks it important to set up a market
warning system for the environmental impact of transport
investment decisions so that the consequences of different
options for the environment will be more apparent.

Another important aspect is that any effective invest-
3.6.2.
ment can only be undertaken when the multinational and
cross-bordering nature of the TEN-T is taken into account.
Therefore, regional as well as cross-border cooperation and
coordination is a must as regards planning, operation, time-
schedule etc. Infrastructure projects must be realized on the
basis of an integrated cross-border network; the Danube States
and ports may be taken as a good example for that demand.

3.8.

Security at borders

The transport sector is particularly sensitive to security aspects
related to terrorist actions and illegal immigration.

( 1) Own-initiative opinion on ‘The future of the trans-European

Inland waterway network’, OJ C 80, 3.4.2002, p. 15.

( 2) Own-initiative opinion on ‘Extending the trans-European net-
works to the islands of Europe’, OJ C 149, 21.6.2002, p. 60.

In the perspective of the enlargement , all necessary precautions
should be taken. At request of the Commission the EESC is
currently preparing an exploratory opinion on this subject.

C 61/170

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

14.3.2003

4. Conclusions

The Committee takes the view that the extension of transport
policy to the applicant countries in the near future is the right
choice. Enlargement will not only have consequences for the
present EU Member States and the applicant countries, but
will also offer possibilities and have consequences for other
countries, such as Russia.

This document considers the situation if enlargement includes
13 applicant countries. The essential point is that they take on

board the Community acquis and especially that they actually
implement it. The Committee has called for special attention
to be given to the latter, because in its view the consequences
of accession for administrative bodies and individuals in the
applicant countries are somewhat underestimated. Examples
of this are the shifting of the EU external frontiers and its social
consequences for customs staff and infrastructure. Similarly,
accession will have radical consequences in the fields of
transport safety and environment.

To sum up, the Committee takes the view that, in terms of
transport policy, enlargement is a sensible choice, but that its
consequences in many fields are underestimated.

Brussels, 19 September 2002.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Göke FRERICHS

Resolution addressed to the European Convention

(2003/C 61/27)

At its 393rd Plenary Session on 18-19 September 2002 (meeting of 19 September) the European
Economic and Social Committee adopted this resolution by 167 votes to four with six abstentions.

1. Preamble

In this resolution the Committee has decided to limit
1.3.
its comments to certain key considerations and standpoints
vis-à-vis the debate on the future of Europe. It reserves the
right to give its views at a later date on certain more specific
matters dealt with by the European Convention.

At European level the Committee is the institutional
1.1.
forum for consulting, representing, informing and expressing
the views of organised civil society, thereby allowing the
representatives of Member States’ economic, social and civic
organisations to be an integral part of the policy-forming and
decision-making process at Community level.

2. The European model of society

1.2.
The Committee’s special relations with Member States’
economic and social councils or similar bodies, and with
organised civil society in the third countries and geographical
groupings with which the European Union maintains struc-
tured relations enhance the added value and legitimacy of its
action in favour of a politically more accessible, more trans-
parent and more participatory Europe. The close relations
which the EESC has established with civil society organisations
not represented in its midst also help boost this added value
and legitimacy. The Committee intends to strengthen these
relations.

2.1.
The EESC expects the Convention to redefine the
European Union’s constitutional foundations. This new defi-
nition will (i) be marked by a balance between cultural diversity
and political unity and (ii) allow the European model of society
to develop while at the same time fostering socio-cultural
identities.

2.2.
The work of the Convention concerns the very essence
of the European identity and the European venture, and the
values on which this venture is based, and is not concerned
solely with ‘competences’ and the distribution of powers.