WRITTEN QUESTION E-3805/02 by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Alpine transit.
Date: 2003-01-07
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Alpine Region, co-financing, common transport policy, engineering structure, environmental impact, proposal (EU), public awareness campaign, rail transport, road traffic, trans-European network

9.10.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 242 E/75

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(12 February 2003)

The Honourable Member is asked to refer to the table being sent directly to him and also to Parliament’s
Secretariat. This gives precise information on the state of advance of the national and regional operational
programmes of the 3rd Greek CSF.

The level of the Commission’s satisfaction over progress in implementing the CSF and any proposals for
improving implementation will depend on the findings of the mid-term evaluation to be made (Article 42
of the Regulation laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds (1)) before the end of 2003.

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999.

(2003/C 242 E/079)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3805/02

by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(7 January 2003)

Subject: Alpine transit

The International Year of Mountains means that particularly frequent reference is being made to the
desirability of conserving the mountain landscape. However, an ever increasing number of private cars and
lorries are traversing the Alps and polluting the environment to an ever increasing extent.

Does the Commission not believe that it would make sense to shift road transport to rail by means of an
intensified information campaign?

If so, will it then make a special effort to achieve rapid implementation of the Brenner base-level tunnel
which is included in the list of
trans-European networks and which would considerably alleviate
congestion on a section of the transit route? If so, what exactly does it intend to do?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(27 February 2003)

The European Transport policy encourages in the White Paper for Transport (1) the modal shift in favour
of railways especially in the Alps. Therefore,
the Alpine region receives a special attention in the
framework of Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T) policy. Two of the 14 Essen priority projects,
Lyon-Turin and Verona-Munich (Brenner axis) were selected with the aim to transfer part of the alpine
road traffic to rail. Also, the Commission has presented a proposal to increase up to 20 % of the maximum
co-finance from the TEN-T budget for railways projects in areas with natural barriers like Alps and
Pyreneans, for which it has obtained the support of the Parliament in first reading.

The rapid preparation and construction of the Brenner base tunnel remains one of the highest priorities of
the trans-European transport network. This is reflected in the Community Guidelines for the development
of the trans-European transport network.

The responsibility for implementing these priorities falls on the Member States concerned. For its part, the
Commission has been closely involved in the preparatory activities for the Brenner base tunnel project: the
Commission co-signed several Memoranda of Understanding, confirming the priority status of the project
and calling upon the parties
financing and
construction. Commission representatives also participate actively in the work of an intergovernmental

involved to accelerate and facilitate its preparation,

C 242 E/76

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

9.10.2003

committee which co-ordinates and supervises project preparation. This committee played a decisive role in
the process towards the setting-up of a Brenner Base Tunnel European Economic Interest Grouping (BBT
EEIG) (cid:1) the independent project authority in charge of the studies that aim at the development consent
for the tunnel (technical, environmental, geological, economical). Amongst the areas studied by BBT are
also legal/financial options for project implementation (to be proposed to the governments concerned for
decision).

Besides its advisory and stimulating role throughout the past years, the Commission has co-financed the
above studies at 50 % of their cost in the framework of the trans-European transport network. Provided the
forthcoming study phase (detailed technical, environmental and geological studies, to be launched in 2003)
will go ahead as planned, the Commission intends to grant further significant financial aid.

(1) COM(2001) 370 final.

(2003/C 242 E/080)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3818/02

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(9 January 2003)

Subject: The competitive position of public transport and the effect of taxation of fuels, infrastructure and

ticket sales

1.
Is the Commission aware of the request by the EU Committee of the Union Internationale des
Transports Publics (UITP) concerning its document 10979/02 of 22 July 2002 on climate protection and
harmonisation of energy taxes, which draws attention to the importance of public transport in protecting
the environment and the financial obstacles which such transport is likely to encounter if it is treated on a
par with car transport for purposes of taxation?

2.
Does the Commission agree with the UITP’s prognosis that the competitive position of public
transport will deteriorate because it is already the case in nine of the 15 EU Member States, and from
2007 will be the case in all of them, that diesel fuel for public transport in urban areas may no longer be
exempted from tax, while moreover urban tram and underground train networks are not regarded as
railways, for which exceptions may be made?

3.
Does the Commission consider that, even now, electricity, natural gas and LPG can render the use of
diesel fuel in urban public transport completely superfluous, and that moreover it is impossible to achieve
the same environmental effect using modern diesel technology as with natural gas or LPG, so that from the
point of view of environmental protection it is defensible permanently to place diesel at a disadvantage and
to ban it?

4.
If it is unavoidable that diesel should continue to play a part in urban public transport for the time
being, how will the Commission prevent the public transport which uses it from being placed at a
competitive disadvantage in relation to motorised private transport, which is far more damaging to the
environment?

5. What other taxes help to prevent the expansion of public transport, such as VAT and levies on
infrastructure, and to what extent do they differ between Member States?

6. What else will the Commission do in the field of harmonisation of taxation in EU Member States to
give public transport an advantage over air transport and motorised private road transport?