WRITTEN QUESTION P-3069/03 by Luciana Sbarbati (ELDR) to the Commission. Adriatic Corridor.
Date: 2003-10-14
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Italy, combined transport, regional policy, trans-European network, transport infrastructure, transport network

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/459

(2004/C 78 E/0485)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3069/03

by Luciana Sbarbati (ELDR) to the Commission

(14 October 2003)

Subject: Adriatic Corridor

The Adriatic Corridor or Corridor 8, defined by the European Council in Essen in 1996, is a transport
route crossing all the regions of eastern Italy, including the Marches, with Ancona as its hub, and linking
central southern Europe with the countries in the eastern Mediterranean and the Middle East.

Corridor 8 is a multi-modal project which would entail substantial transport infrastructure (roads and
railways), oil and gas pipelines, telecommunications, etc.

The recent Van Miert plan (priority projects to be made operational by 2020) does not take account of
Corridor 8, which is a disastrous, discriminatory and hence unacceptable decision as far as the Marches,
the Veneto, Emilia Romagna, Abruzzo, Apulia and Basilicata are concerned.

The 1996 guidelines for the TEN-T need to be revised, both in order to solve the increasingly complex
infrastructure problems and with a view to enlargement, but the Van Miert plan cannot be welcomed since
it is biased in favour of northern Europe and penalises the south and the Mediterranean, an area which
offers a great opportunity (cid:1) and at the same time a great challenge for Europe (cid:1) for the economic,
cultural and social cohesion of peoples and countries with whom we are to enter into a new dialogue on a
broad scale.

If Italy, in its position in the Mediterranean, is thus an important bridge between north and south, east and
west, it is hard to understand why both the Adriatic Corridor and the Tyrrhenian Corridor, devised on the
basis of the criteria of intermodality and interoperability, have been removed from the list of priority
projects. Only the bridge across the Straits of Messina remains, but it will be a dead-end both territorially
and logistically if it is not linked up to the transport corridors.

In view of all this, can the Commission say whether it intends to ensure that at least the Adriatic Corridor
is reincorporated in the list of essential projects for 2020, not least with a view to the enlargement of the
EU to the east and the need to improve the infrastructure of ‘pivotal’ areas such as the Adriatic coast?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(7 November 2003)

Corridor VIII was not defined by the European Council of Essen.

The Pan European Transport Corridors were defined by the Pan-European Conferences of Ministers of
Transport in Crete in 1994 and Helsinki in 1997. These corridors, crossing the countries of Central and
Eastern Europe and connecting with the network of the Union, made it possible to co-ordinate the
interventions of the various authorities, including those of the Community, that already supported the
Central and Eastern European countries through the PHARE and ISPA programmes.

The mandate of the High Level Group, chaired by Mr Van Miert, was to identify priority projects on the
transeuropean transport network, (TEN-T). Its report, which was advisory, assisted the Commission in its
revision of the guidelines of the TEN-T.

As Corridor VIII is located outside the territory of the Union, (with the exception of the ports of Bari and
Brindisi) it was not within the mandate of the Group to consider it for inclusion in the list of TEN-T
priority projects. By the same logic the Commission did not include it in the recently adopted Decision on
the revision of the TEN-T guidelines (1).

(1) Decision No 1229/2003/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2003 laying down a series of
guidelines for trans-European energy networks and repealing Decision No 1254/96/EC, OJ L 176, 15.7.2003.