WRITTEN QUESTION P-2810/03 by Ari Vatanen (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Allowing longer truck combinations in Europe.
Date: 2003-09-17
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: carriage of goods, commercial vehicle, road transport, single market, transport authorisation, transport regulations, weight and size

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/171

The short and medium term part of this activity supports projects aiming at the cost reduction of
renewable energy technologies and their large scale integration within local communities. Common
contributions for the conversion of individual dwelling houses to solar power may be available only if the
action is integrated within a large project, that presents appropriate elements of research and technological
innovation, and has a clear European dimension.

(2004/C 78 E/0175)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2809/03

by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission

(19 September 2003)

Subject: Innovative actions in the fisheries sector, 2003/C 115/08

Under reference No 2003/C 115/08 the Commission published a competition for innovative actions in the
fisheries sector (1).

The Notice of the Competition fails to provide two essential elements, namely the dates on which a
decision will be taken and the competitors informed of the outcome.

When does the Commission intend to rectify this omission?

When and in what shape can I have access to the list of projects approved?

(1) OJ C 115, 15.5.2003.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(9 October 2003)

in point 2.3 of the call for proposals referred to states:

The section ‘Duration of project, date foreseen for closing the awarding procedure and admissible financing
‘… the date foreseen for closing the
period’
awarding procedure is 15 October 2003. Projects are expected to start on 1 December 2003’. Therefore,
as this indicative timetable implies, the selection procedure for proposals received will be completed by the
end of 2003 and applicants will then be informed directly by mail of the outcome of their proposal(s).

Once the beneficiaries have given their assent by signing their grant agreements, the Commission will
publish a list of projects and beneficiaries and the amounts granted.

(2004/C 78 E/0176)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2810/03

by Ari Vatanen (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(17 September 2003)

Subject: Allowing longer truck combinations in Europe

Finland and Sweden are allowed to use vehicles up to 25,25 m in length on their territories. This has
proved very effective and safe.

The benefits of longer trucks are multiple:

(cid:1) less fuel consumption

(cid:1) less emissions per tonne km

(cid:1) less room taken on the roads

C 78 E/172

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

(cid:1) less tear and wear of the road network

(cid:1) lower transport costs and thus lower prices for consumers

More specifically, in a study made by the Swedish Road Administration (Vägverket) in connection with the
so-called Extra Project it was concluded that the large trucks make unnecessary approximately one third of
journeys and reduce total costs by 23 %.

Already now modular solutions (motor vehicle coupled to two modules of 13,6 m and 7,82 m) are
allowed in the EU. However, for the better functioning of the internal market it would be logical to permit
the use of the Finnish and Swedish types in the entire EU. Naturally there may be roads where such long
combinations prove difficult but this should obviously not preclude their use on the rest of the road
network.

Does the Commission acknowledge the benefits of the truck lengths used in Finland and Sweden and

1.
the market inefficiencies the current system leads to?

If it does, how and when will the Commission act in order to ensure that these benefits are extended

2.
to the rest of the European Union?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(10 October 2003)

The Commission is aware of the fact that the use of long vehicles could contribute to a more efficient
transport of goods. Although the modular concept is allowed in the Union, Member States have not made
any use of this possibility except for some limited experiments such as in the Netherlands. Reasons could
be that it is not yet clear how such vehicles will impact on road safety under different traffic and road
conditions nor how their use would affect the distribution of the transport of goods between the various
modes.

The Commission has the intention to organise a meeting in the beginning of 2004 with Member States’
experts in the field of vehicle weights and dimensions to discuss the need for any change to the existing
related Community legislation.

(2004/C 78 E/0177)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2811/03

by Rosa Miguélez Ramos (PSE) to the Commission

(18 September 2003)

Subject: Situation of the Mauritanian fishing ground

In its communication on an integrated framework for fisheries partnership agreements with third
countries (1) and in the Green Paper on reform of the CFP, the Commission emphasises the development
cooperation component which these international fisheries agreements must contain.

Development cooperation should not mean that fishing agreements become unbalanced, with financial
compensation far exceeding the value of catch possibilities, but that the Community and European firms
fishery
should transfer technology and know-how to developing countries so that
resources increase in value. This means that third countries must properly regulate the exploitation of
fishery resources so that their fleets also practise sustainable fishing.

those countries’

At present, however, genuine fisheries development cooperation is not taking place, particularly in relation
to the main agreement with Mauritania, and the Commission is not exerting pressure on the other party,
i.e. the Mauritanian Government, to guarantee the proper sustainable management of fishery resources.
The result is that the Community fleet cannot catch the quotas granted under the agreement and the
agreement is therefore not profitable for Community firms, which have to pay a large fee and subsequently
find that, owing to Mauritania’s failure to ensure the sustainable management of resources, there are not
sufficient resources available.