Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the promotion of clean road transport vehicles
Date: 2006-06-15
Institutions: European Committee of the Regions
Subjects: environmental policy, environmental protection, motor vehicle, quality of the environment, road transport

C 229/18

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

22.9.2006

Commission text

CoR amendment

R 11 Use of wastes obtained from any of the operations
numbered R 1 to R 10

R 11
tions numbered R 1 to R 10

Use of wastes obtained from any of the opera-

R 12
operations numbered R 1 to R 11

Exchange of wastes for submission to any of the

R 12
operations numbered R 1 to R 11

Exchange of wastes for submission to any of the

R 13
Storage of wastes pending any of the operations
numbered R 1 to R 12 (excluding temporary storage,
pending collection, on the site where the waste is
produced)

R 13
Storage of wastes pending any of the operations
numbered R 1 to R 12 (excluding temporary storage,
pending collection, on the site where the waste is
produced)

R e a son

Annex II to the Directive on Waste should, as stated in the justification for amendment 5, be transferred to
a separate Regulation and, in accordance with previous amendments, be deleted.

Brussels, 14 June 2006.

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Michel DELEBARRE

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parlia-
ment and of the Council on the promotion of clean road transport vehicles

(2006/C 229/02)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

Having regard to the Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the
promotion of clean road transport vehicles (COM(2005) 634 final — 2005/0283 (COD));

Having regard to the decision of the European Commission on 21 December 2005 to consult it on this
subject, under Article 175 and Article 265 (1) of the Treaty establishing the European Community;

Having regard to the decision taken by its president on 24 January 2006 to instruct the Commission for
Sustainable Development to draw up the opinion on the subject;

Having regard to its opinion on the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European
Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — Towards
a thematic strategy on the urban environment (COM(2004) 60 final — CdR 93/2004 fin) (1);

Having regard to its opinion on the White Paper ‘European transport policy for 2010: time to decide’
(COM(2001) 370 final — CdR 54/2001 fin) (2);

Having regard to its opinion on the Communication from the Commission to the Council and the Euro-
pean Parliament The 2005 Review of the EU Sustainable Development Strategy: Initial Stocktaking and
Future Orientations (COM(2005) 37 final — CdR 66/2005 fin);

(1) OJ C 43 of 18 February 2005, p. 35.
(2) OJ C 192 of 12 August 2002, p.8.

22.9.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 229/19

Having regard to its draft opinion (CdR 48/2006 rev. 1) adopted on 3 April 2006 by its Commission for
Sustainable Development (rapporteur: Ms Karlsson, Municipal Commissioner and Member of Vindeln
Municipal Executive Board (SE/ALDE));

Whereas

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Local and regional authorities are the decision-making and executive level which is closest to EU citi-
zens. The measures needed to bring about cleaner air in Europe must be devised, accepted, imple-
mented and monitored in dialogue with European Union citizens.

In the EU's 25 Member States it is at local and regional level that the proposed measures to limit
the environmental impact of vehicle traffic must be put into practice.

Promoting use of environmental vehicles is in line with the local and regional authority objective to
decrease energy consumption and, as a result, atmospheric pollution.

The local and regional authorities should not carry the burden for promoting clean vehicles alone.
Measures are urgently needed for the immediate involvement of the private sector and enterprises
carrying out public-sector tasks.

It is through the combined impact of measures implemented locally and regionally that the unsus-
tainable trends that we see today can be reversed.

adopted the following opinion at its 65th plenary session, held on 14 and 15 June 2006 (meeting
of 15 June):

1. Committee of the Regions' comments

The Committee of the Regions

General

1.1 welcomes the Commission's aim to improve air quality
through green public procurement;

calls for the measures, set out in the proposal for a
1.2
directive, on the procurement of clean road transport vehicles
by public bodies to take the form of a recommendation;

would stress that,

1.3
if however a directive were to be
adopted, the proposed measures must be taken forward in
close cooperation with the EU's municipalities and regions.
Consultation upstream of
the current draft directive was
primarily with the car and fuel industry and the Member States
at national level;

assumes that, the municipalities and regions are to be
1.4
involved in further efforts to frame, implement, follow up and
evaluate the measures proposed in the directive should it be
adopted; does not, however, consider it necessary expressly to
set up a committee to advise the Commission in its work;

1.5
would stress the need to inform the public on the
measures implemented and to explain the European legislative
process and its effects by means of practical examples.. The
local and regional level has an important role to play here, as
— inter alia — the Commission's white paper on EU communi-
cation policy confirms;

endorses the essential grounds for and objectives of the
1.6
Commission proposal; would, however, stress that
laying
down rules on the award of contracts which apply only to the
public sector is unacceptable. As the European Commission
correctly states in its proposal for a directive, the public sector's
share of the market for vans and lorries is only 6 %, but
around 30 % for buses. The Committee would therefore advo-
cate an approach which also involves the private sector to a
greater extent. The Committee would, as a matter of principle,
draw attention to the importance of adopting ‘soft’, non-legisla-
tive measures in the field of green procurement if the requisite
in particular, are
basic conditions are in place. Large cities,
ready voluntarily to achieve high environmental protection
objectives;

1.7
points out that, if obligations are imposed one-sidedly
on the public sector, less financially well endowed authorities
in particular might be deterred from investing or forced to
outsource services of general interest;

Other measures for promoting clean road transport

1.8
calls for a holistic approach to potential measures to
promote clean road transport. The Committee has reservations
about the mandatory requirement contained in the proposed
Directive that public bodies should procure 25 % of heavy duty
vehicles on the basis of clean vehicle standards. It would be
preferable to apply engine standards for all vehicles and all
customer groups. Additional measures are required in order to
comply with existing limit values for atmospheric pollution;

C 229/20

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

22.9.2006

1.9 welcomes the intention to promote the use of biofuels.
Increasing the production of bioethanol and biodiesel
in
Europe in order to replace traditional road fuels (petrol and
diesel) would bring several benefits. It would:

duction and development of wood crops for the production
of biofuels;

— reduce greenhouse gas emissions from transport;

Implementation of the proposed directive at local and regional level

— safeguard energy supplies as oil reserves dwindle;

— offer the EU's agricultural and forestry sector opportunities
to grow crops and produce wood raw material for the
manufacture of biofuels;

— provide developing countries with an opportunity to export

biofuels to the EU;

— reduce consumption of natural resources;

Suggested measures

1.10
rejects the directive on the promotion of clean road
transport vehicles; the following measures should instead be
taken:

— the Commission must draw up a time frame for a European
traffic and transport policy that tackles the issue at source,
and work to ensure that:

— the Euro 5 standards apply to passenger transport from

2007;

1.11
would stress that conditions for implementing the
proposed directive on promoting clean road transport would
vary across the different Member States:

— In most Member States the measures that ensue from the
proposed directive would be financed wholly or partly
through national taxation. In a number of Member States
the measures are financed through municipal and regional
taxation and charges.

— The market for environmental vehicles varies across the EU.
Access to clean vehicles varies because inter alia a number
of Member States have introduced voluntary commitments
to purchase or hire a certain percentage of environmental
vehicles, which has boosted the clean vehicles market. The
development and introduction of environmental manage-
ment systems and the EU's environmental management and
in public works have also
accounting system (EMAS)
contributed to the increase in environmental vehicles.

— Another factor where the Member States differ when it
comes to their ability to introduce various types of environ-
mentally friendly vehicles is the amount
that has been
invested in infrastructure. Access to fuel pumps for various
types of fuel is an important pre-requisite for the develop-
ment of the market for environmental vehicles.

— the Euro 6 standards apply to diesel-powered passenger

vehicles and light vans from 2011;

Given these differing conditions, support
regional level would need to vary across the EU;

to the local and

— the Euro VI standards apply to lorries from 2012;

— information and training initiatives must be provided in
order to support and develop public sector procurement of
clean vehicles. The Commission's handbook on Green
Public Procurement is a valuable tool
in this regard but
more initiatives are needed;

— initiatives must be taken in order to develop tools to build

environmental requirements into public purchasing;

— support must be provided for the development of a green
network for public procurement. This would make it
possible to carry out comparative studies, promote best
practice and set common objectives;

— EU pump-priming research and development

initiatives
must be prioritised within the area of clean vehicles and
related fields;

Follow-up

1.12
would stress, in case of the adoption of a directive, the
need for a follow-up and evaluation of its implementation in
close cooperation with the municipal and regional level. It is
important that the results of the directive be compiled and
presented, both in terms of
the number of clean vehicles
produced and the impact this has had on air quality. Feedback
to the municipal and regional level and to EU citizens is essen-
tial if the directive's intentions are to be pursued and developed.
It is also important to the future implementation of additional
measures for promoting clean road transport.

2. Committee of the Regions' recommendations

— priority should also be given to the development of indi-
genous renewable energy sources in line with the promo-
tion of clean road transport vehicles. To this end, the requi-
site mechanisms should be set up to encourage the intro-

2.1
calls on EU lawmakers to include uniform measures for
the public and private sector in ongoing efforts to promote
clean road transport;

22.9.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 229/21

assumes

2.2
for green public
that economic support
procurement is to be given to the municipal and regional level;

underlines the need for information and training initia-
2.3
tives to support and develop public sector procurement of
clean vehicles;

calls for a holistic approach to potential measures to

2.4
promote clean road transport;

2.5
suggests that the reporting system used to follow up a
possible directive on promoting clean road transport be coordi-
nated with other reporting systems. Coordination should be
inter alia with the reporting system proposed in the draft direc-
tive on air quality and cleaner air in Europe;

2.6
assumes that the municipalities and regions are to be
involved in further efforts to frame, implement, follow up and
evaluate the measures proposed in a possible directive.

Brussels, 15 June 2006.

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Michel DELEBARRE

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Proposal for a Recommendation of the European
Parliament and of the Council on key competences for lifelong learning

(2006/C 229/03)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

Having regard to the Proposal for a Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council On
key competences for lifelong learning (COM(2005) 548 final — 2005/0221 (COD));

Having regard to the decision of the European Commission of 28 November 2005 to consult it on this
subject, under the first paragraph of Article 265 of the Treaty establishing the European Community;

Having regard to the decision of its President of 24 January 2006 to instruct its Commission for Culture
and Education to draw up an opinion on this subject;

Having regard to its opinion on the Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the
Council establishing An integrated action programme in the field of lifelong learning (CdR 258/2004 fin (1));

Having regard to its opinion on the Communication from the Commission — Making a European area of
lifelong learning a reality (CdR 49/2002 fin (2));

Having regard to its opinion on the Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the
Council concerning The seventh framework programme of the European Community for research, technological
development and demonstration activities (2007-2013) (CdR 155/2005 fin);

Having regard to its opinion on the Adoption of a multi-annual programme (2004-2006) for the effective inte-
gration of
in education and training systems in Europe
(eLearning Programme) (CdR 73/2003 fin (3));

Information and Communication Technologies (ICT)

Having regard to its opinion on the Communication from the Commission on Promoting Language
Learning and Linguistic Diversity: An Action Plan 2004-2006 (CdR 248/2003 fin (4));

(1) OJ C 164, 5.7.2005, p. 59.
(2) OJ C 278, 14.11.2002, p. 26.
(3) OJ C 244, 10.10.2003, p. 42.
(4) OJ C 73, 23.3.2004, p. 33.