Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament — Keep Europe moving — Sustainable mobility for our continent — Mid-term review of the European Commission's 2001 Transport White Paper COM(2006) 314 final
Date: 2007-03-15
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: ESC opinion, environmental protection, geographical mobility, innovation, sustainable development, transport network, transport policy

13.7.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 161/89

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Communication from the
Commission to the Council and the European Parliament — Keep Europe moving — Sustainable
mobility for our continent — Mid-term review of the European Commission's 2001 Transport
White Paper

COM(2006) 314 final

(2007/C 161/23)

On 22 June 2006, the European Commission decided to consult the European Economic and Social
Committee, under Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned
communication.

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 21 February 2007. The rapporteur
was Mr Barbadillo López.

At its 434th plenary session, held on 14 and 15 March 2007 (meeting of 15 March), the European
Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 144 votes to three, with 24 abstentions.

1. Conclusions and recommendations

Since the Transport White Paper was published in 2001
1.1
the general situation has developed in a very different way from
what was expected. Economic growth has been lower, the oil
price has risen sharply, enlargement has given the EU a conti-
nental dimension, new technological developments are trans-
forming transport into a cutting-edge technological sector, there
is a constant terrorist threat and the modal breakdown of the
transport market has changed. All of these factors require a re-
orientation of transport policy.

But

the overall objectives of

1.2
transport policy have
remained unchanged: competitive, sustainable, safe, environ-
ment-friendly mobility of persons and goods offering higher-
quality employment. These objectives are fully in line with the
revised Lisbon Agenda for growth and employment but have
not yet fully engaged with the longer term objectives of the
revised strategy for sustainable development and the climate
change challenge. In particular the revision does not yet set out
a coherent longer term strategy for achieving the first objective
for sustainable transport set out in the revised sustainable devel-
‘decoupling economic growth and the
opment strategy of
demand for transport’.

1.2(a) While supporting all the measures which the Commis-
sion proposes for making the different transport methods more
energy efficient and less carbon-intensive the Committee ques-
tions whether this will ultimately be sufficient to achieve all the
reductions of carbon emissions needed from Europe by the
middle of the century. They therefore urge the Commission to
put in hand now studies of the kind of measures that may be
needed to achieve a reduction in the overall level of demand for
transport in the longer term. This should include consideration
of appropriate pricing signals; and a recasting of urban spatial
and planning policies to encourage more local provision and
access to goods and services of all kinds, and less reliance on

ever longer distance of transportation of people and goods. It
should also include consideration of how to open up a broader
public debate on these issues, and an exploration of how
responsible individuals and businesses can best contribute to
long term sustainability through their own transport and travel
decisions and behaviour.

The EU is highly diverse, with very different orographic,
1.3
territorial and demographic characteristics, with both central
countries with high levels of congestion and transit traffic and
very extensive peripheral areas without this constant pressure
on their infrastructure. The Committee highlights the need to
bring a geographically differentiated approach to transport
policy.

1.4
The EESC supports the aims of the revised White Paper,
which aims to optimise all modes of transport, on their own
and in combination, enhancing the specific potential of each,
the aim being less polluting and more efficient
transport
systems which guarantee the sustainable mobility of persons
and goods.

1.5
The EESC considers it necessary to improve interoper-
ability between transport modes and increase the competitive-
ness of rail, maritime and inland waterway transport in order to
boost their effectiveness and efficiency, and to increase their
share of the transport market in order to underpin their long-
term viability. It also considers that the public authorities can
promote coordination between the different modes.

1.6
The Committee recommends that account be taken of
public inter-city road passenger services, as a way of achieving
the objectives set by the Commission, such as reducing conges-
tion, pollution and fuel consumption and improving road safety,
on the basis of this transport mode's high passenger-carrying
capacity, with a significant increase in the role of public trans-
port vis-à-vis private cars.

C 161/90

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

13.7.2007

1.7
Air transport has undergone a major expansion in the
last ten years, as a result of the opening up of the market, but
the uneven application of
the third package in the various
Member States and existing restrictions in the internal market
are leading to distortions of competition. The operation of the
internal market therefore needs to be improved.

Transport

1.15
infrastructure, particularly in urban areas,
should support the development of public transport. Investment
policy should be used to gradually limit the space available for
private car transport.

1.8
The absence of an internal maritime transport market is
preventing the EU from optimising regulations on internal
traffic and thus simplifying internal trade, with all of the atten-
dant damaging repercussions for integrating this traffic into
internal modal chains.

Transport is one of the EU's major employers, but the
1.9
lack of staff is leading to more recruitment of third-country
workers, which suggests that efforts are needed to improve the
training, image and quality of transport-related vocations among
young people, which is an area where the social partners can
play a role.

1.10
The common transport policy should continue to have
an impact on the technical, fiscal and social harmonisation of
each transport mode on its own and of all of them in combina-
tion, in order to promote a framework that ensures a genuinely
level playing field.

1.11
Service quality needs to be improved to make transport
modes attractive to users. The Committee notes with satisfaction
the attention paid in the mid-term review of the White Paper to
the rights of passengers of all modes of transport, especially the
rights of persons with reduced mobility, while taking account of
the specific characteristics of each mode.

The protection of modes of

1.12
transport should be a
priority objective, and security measures should be extended to
all modes of transport and their infrastructure, while avoiding
unnecessary security checks and safeguarding the human rights
and privacy of users.

Transport is a major consumer of fossil fuel energy, and
1.13
reducing its dependence on these energy sources and reducing
CO2 emissions from transport should be priorities, to which
end a specific R&D and innovation programme should be
drawn up for transport, with appropriate funding, which is able
to stimulate the use of alternative sources of energy, primarily in
urban areas; in addition a policy should be implemented that
distinguishes between modes, especially as regards taxation, and
which encourages the adoption and use of new, environmen-
tally-friendly technologies.

Infrastructure provides the physical network needed for
1.14
the internal transport market and opti-
the development of
mising this requires that
reducing
congestion and increasing accessibility by mobilising all sources
of funding.

two objectives be met:

2. Introduction and Commission proposal

The aim of

the Commission's 1992 Transport White
2.1
Paper, entitled The future development of
the common transport
policy (1), was to create a single market for transport, facilitating
mobility in general, by opening up the market. In ten years,
except in the rail sector, the aims have broadly speaking being
achieved.

In September 2001, the European Commission published
2.2
a new White Paper, entitled European transport policy for 2010:
time to decide (2), which proposed 60 measures for shifting the
balance between modes of transport, eliminating bottlenecks,
placing users at the heart of transport policy and managing the
effects of globalisation.

2.3
In order to speed up decision-making and to evaluate the
results achieved, the 2001 White Paper established a review
mechanism requiring the Commission to present a timetable
with specific aims, to make an overall assessment in 2005 of
the implementation of the measures set out in the White Paper
and, where necessary,
is the
consideration in this
Commission communication under
opinion.

to make changes. The result

The approach adopted in the mid-term review of the
2.4
White Paper is based, amongst other things, on the reorienta-
tion of transport demand towards more environment-friendly
modes, in particular as regards long-distance transport, urban
areas and congested transport corridors. At the same time all
modes of transport are required to become more environment-
friendly, safe and efficient from the energy point of view.

The Commission communication entitled Keep Europe
2.5
moving — Sustainable mobility for our continent was drawn up on
the basis of consultations held in the course of 2005. These
consultations highlighted transport's central role in economic
growth and the need to re-adjust policy measures.

The overall objectives of

2.6
transport policy remain the
same: a competitive, secure, safe, and environmentally friendly
mobility for persons and goods, with better employment condi-
tions. These objectives are fully in line with the revised Lisbon
agenda for jobs and growth and with the revised Sustainable
Development Strategy.

(1) COM(92) 494 of 2 December 1992: The future development of the

common transport policy.

(2) COM(2001) 370 of 12 September 2001: European transport policy for

2010: time to decide.

13.7.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 161/91

the most

Innovation is one of

2.7
tools for
achieving these objectives: introducing intelligent, communica-
tions-based transport systems and more advanced engine tech-
nology to achieve greater energy efficiency and promoting and
using alternative fuels.

important

The key to the mid-term review of the White Paper,
2.8
however, lies in co-modality, in other words, the efficient use of
different modes on their own and in combination, which ‘will
result in the optimal and sustainable utilisation of resources’.
This approach is the best guarantee of achieving a high level of
mobility and of environmental protection at the same time.

3. General comments

The EESC maintains and reiterates the view set out in its
3.1
opinion on the White Paper of 19 June 2002, that the current
mid-term review should make it clear that, given developments
in the transport sector and in the economic, political and social
situation of
there needs to be an effective and
immediate adaptation of the common transport policy to take
account of the changes that have occurred during the period
under review and of foreseeable future developments.

the Union,

3.2
It also endorses the policies aimed at improving techno-
logical potential to find innovative solutions that will contribute
directly to the European competitiveness, safety, environmental
and social agendas.

3.3
The context is very different from the one imagined at
the time the 2001 Transport White Paper was drawn up: lower
than expected economic growth, geopolitical tensions, rising oil
prices, the effects of EU enlargement, globalisation, new techno-
logical developments, the ongoing terrorist threat and changes
in the balance between transport modes. The Commission
communication aims at adapting EU transport policy to the
context in which future growth and policies must be deter-
mined.

The rationale for the mid-term review of the 2001 White
3.4
Paper is not only the new context described above but also the
much-needed reorientation of EU transport policy that
the
White Paper sets out. The review of the White Paper, must focus
just as intently on a transport policy designed to optimise all
modes of transport, through processes that make them more
competitive, sustainable, socially beneficial, environmentally-
friendly and safe, with sustainability that is anchored in their
close relationship with progress and economic growth, and on
the necessary coordination between the different modes, which
can be promoted by the public authorities.

The review also makes a very welcome proposal to bring
3.5
into line with environmental priorities, under the
transport
concept of ‘sustainable transport’, and does this in a similar way
for the different modes of transport. Unfortunately, however,
the
the studies made by the Commission in section 3 of

communication's Annex II, concerning transport and the envir-
onment, are not broken down by type of road transport, with
separate figures for public and private transport use, which
would provide a model showing the detrimental effects of,
primarily, intensive and unbridled car use on congestion, safety,
pollution and energy consumption, amongst other things.

3.6
Given the continuity of this transport policy, the EESC
considers that a more realistic position should be advocated,
and this would mean:

a) speeding up the regulatory processes for introducing a mari-
time transport system and a rail transport system based on
regulated competition, as a way of making these more effec-
tive and efficient;

b) the effects of road transport, caused by traffic congestion
and pollution, mainly from private vehicles, together with
the relentless growth predicted by the Commission for the
period 2000-2020, must be subject to specific measures that
tackle these problems so as to allow for growth while redu-
cing the harmful effects of road transport (new infrastruc-
ture, technology, etc.);

c) public passenger transport

is essential

for obtaining the

results envisaged by these policies;

d) determining precisely the effects that commercial vehicles of
the environment,

less than 3.5 tonnes have on safety,
working conditions and the economy.

3.7
There is, therefore, a need to boost the effectiveness and
efficiency of maritime, inland waterway and rail transport, by
promoting the competitiveness of these sectors, strengthening
coordination and intermodality, with measures in place enabling
it to continue to provide its services with the appropriate flex-
ibility and pricing.

3.8
In the Committee's view the studies so far undertaken
also fall short in that they do not directly address the funda-
mental goal adopted in the revised sustainable development
strategy of decoupling economic growth and the demand for
transport. Moreover they do not work through the implications
of the climate change challenge and the level of CO2 reductions
that will be needed in the next 50 years. Given the rapid growth
in mobility over the last 50 years, and the apparently continuing
appetite for yet more growth of movement (both in Europe and
still more in the developing world) the Committee has serious
doubts as to whether it will be possible to achieve the carbon
reductions needed from the transport sector to avoid climate
catastrophe simply by promoting greater energy efficiency in
the different transport modes and optimisation of the balance
between them, desirable though all those objectives are. They
believe that the Commission needs to put in hand as a matter of
urgency studies of the kind of measures that may be needed
soon to discourage the growth in demand for ever greater mobi-
should include appropriate pricing signals, and
lity. This

C 161/92

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

13.7.2007

appropriate urban spatial and planning policies to encourage
more local provision of goods and services of all kinds to meet
peoples' aspirations without
requiring them to travel ever
greater distances to satisfy them. It should also include consid-
eration of how to open up a broader public debate on these
issues, and an exploration of how responsible individuals and
businesses can best contribute to long term sustainability
through their own transport and travel decisions and behaviour.

Transport policy must demonstrate commitment

3.9
to
quality, safety, the environment and transport efficiency and
guarantee users' a choice of transport modes. Transport must
achieve economically and socially sustainable levels of coverage,
not forgetting, where appropriate, public service obligations and
the right to mobility, which is enshrined in the Treaties.

been studied, give the EU a cohesive and sustainable transport
policy for the future.

3.14
The Commission communication states that most of
the measures set out in the White Paper have been adopted or
proposed, and that their impacts are described and evaluated in
Annex 3, which is not included in the communication. The
EESC requests that a detailed chronological list of the measures
be adopted and their impact included, or that the address of the
Internet page on which they are published be clearly provided.

4. Specific comments

3.10
Population is distributed unequally within the EU. With
an average of 116 inhabitants per km2, population density
varies from 374 inhabitants per km2 in the Netherlands to
between 15 and 21 in the Nordic Countries. The percentage of
a country's total population living in urban areas also varies.
The
from
Belgium's 97.2 % to 59.9 % in Greece. The problems of captive
transport users in rural areas should be highlighted.

European

average

ranges

80 %,

and

is

3.11
The EESC wishes to emphasise the need to adopt a
geographically differentiated approach to transport policy, since
the EU is a highly diverse territory with very different topogra-
phical, territorial and demographic etc., characteristics, in which
core countries, containing areas with high levels of congestion
and significant through-traffic, coexist with very large peripheral
or rural areas that do not face the same constant pressure on
their infrastructure. These two models require different and
specific approaches, within the framework of
the common
transport policy.

3.12
There is also the problem of the peripheral countries,
far from the large population and production centres, which
have higher transport costs and consequently, higher costs for
producing and marketing their products — one of the disadvan-
tages of
that
improved accessibility must be a priority tool for increasing
countries' or regions' competitive capacity and for strengthening
territorial cohesion.

remoteness. The EESC therefore

considers

3.13
Both the Commission communication and the 2001
Transport White Paper are documents that need to be fleshed
out,
in that: a) they provide no clear economic/financial or
budgetary analysis of the issues that the Commission considers
should be addressed; b) transport policy does not give regulated
competition the leading role that the Commission itself claims it
should have and c) more detailed work needs to be done on
breaking down environmental and other studies by modes and
particular types of transport, in order to study the effects and
possible solutions.

In order

to carry out a systematic analysis of

4.1
the
communication on the mid-term review of the 2001 Transport
White Paper, some general aspects will now be set out on which
the EESC considers it necessary to make constructive contribu-
tions, following the communication's own format.

4.2 Sustainable mobility in the

internal market — connecting

Europeans

4.2.1
The Commission states that ‘the EU's internal market is
the main instrument for achieving a vibrant transport industry
which brings growth and jobs. As the aviation sector and other
sectors such as telecommunications have shown, the process of
liberalisation of the internal market stimulates innovation and
investment to bring better service at a lower cost. The same
success can be achieved throughout the transport sector’. In air
transport the results have been more choice for users and lower
fares.

Road transport: in order to analyse the issue of road
4.2.2
transport objectively, it must be broken down by mode and by
specific characteristic, since the largest share of intra-EU trans-
port is carried by road, which accounts for 44 % of freight and
around 85 % of passenger transport. Motor vehicles (3) in the
EU 25 are distributed as follows: 212 million passenger cars,
30.702 million commercial vehicles, 25.025 million powered
two-wheelers and 719 400 buses and coaches. This clearly
shows where the main responsibility for the EU's major conges-
tion and environmental problems lies.

4.2.2.1
The communication makes no reference to public
intercity road passenger transport, thus seriously undermining
the potential solution of getting car passengers to switch to this
mode of transport, which would generate all kinds of benefits
and savings relating to safety, the environment, land use, flex-
ibility etc. The EESC considers that account should be taken of
this mode of transport in order to achieve the stated aims.
Consequently, legislation is needed to permit the development
of regulated competition, so that regular intercity road passenger
transport services can be established, which would have to
comply with EU and Member State rules on advertising and
competition.

The EESC considers that consultation measures should be
adopted, setting out initiatives that will, once the problems have

(3) Energy and transport in figures 2005. Directorate-General for Energy

and Transport. European Commission.

13.7.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 161/93

The Commission looks at ways of reducing excessive
4.2.2.2
differences in fuel
instead of
tax levels for road transport
adopting a more general approach to the issue by introducing a
common tax policy for all modes of transport, which does not
penalise any mode of transport more than another, to ensure
equal treatment.

4.2.3
Rail transport: Since 1970 the railways' market share
has declined from 10 % to 6 % of passenger transport and
21 % to 8 % of goods transport.
International goods trains
cross the EU at an average speed of 18 kph. The main chal-
lenges facing the railways are competition with the other
modes, the interoperability of the different systems and the fact
that the railways specialise in transporting certain goods.

The EESC considers that making rail transport more
4.2.3.1
it achieves the
competitive is the only way to ensure that
thus increasing
desired level of efficiency and effectiveness,
demand for this mode of transport and restoring its long-term
viability; this would require an in-depth review of all legislation
on this matter and of its implementation in the various Member
States.

4.2.3.2
Nevertheless, as it stated in its opinion on the 2001
Transport White Paper (4), the Committee shares the view that
the principle of ‘regulated competition’ should apply to services
of general economic interest,
including public rail and road
passenger transport, which under Article 16 of the EC Treaty
are considered essential to promoting social and territorial cohe-
sion.

4.2.4
Air transport: The framework of liberalisation created
by Regulations (EEC) No 2407/92, 2408/92 and 2409/92, the
internal market
in aviation's ‘third package’, has helped to
achieve the transformation of air transport services, making
them more efficient and affordable. However, the third package's
differing implementation in the different Member States and the
remaining restrictions on intra-Community air services create
distortions of competition (for example, different requirements
for granting operating licences, discriminatory treatment on
routes to third countries, discrimination against airlines on
the internal
grounds of nationality, etc.). The operation of
market therefore needs to be reviewed, changes must be made
to eliminate potential distortions and the ‘single sky’ regulatory
framework must be completed, thus making air transport in the
EU more efficient.

transport
4.2.5 Maritime transport: More than 90 % of
between Europe and the rest of
the world passes through
seaports, and 40 % of intra-European transport goes by sea.
Maritime transport, especially short sea shipping, has experi-
enced growth similar to that in road haulage and it has great
development potential given the EU's long coastline following
enlargement. The EESC considers that the Commission ought to
monitor the movement of goods by sea and take the measures

(4) OJ C 241, 7.10.2002.

necessary to adapt to this development (5).

4.2.5.1
The lack of an internal market for sea transport, due
to the fact that journeys by sea between two Member States are
considered to take place outside the Union under international
law,
is preventing the EU from optimising the regulation of
trade, with negative
internal
repercussions for the integration of this into the internal modal
chains.

traffic and simplifying internal

4.2.5.2
The EESC considers the better integration of port
services to be an essential basis on which to draw up and intro-
duce a common maritime transport policy, which will help to
develop the ‘motorways of the sea’ and to promote ‘short-sea
shipping’, making maritime transport more efficient and compe-
titive within the logistics chain, which will help to improve
sustainable mobility.

4.3 Sustainable mobility for the citizen — reliable, safe and secure

transport

4.3.1
Employment and working conditions: transport is one
of the main employers in the EU, accounting for 5 % of all jobs,
but employment levels are now stabilising.
In some sectors,
such as rail and road transport, a lack of skilled workers has
appeared, which has contributed to an increase in third-country
labour. The EESC shares the Commission's view on the need to
step up efforts to improve training and quality of employment
for those working in the sector,
in order to make transport-
related vocations more attractive to young people.

there must be training
4.3.1.1
To achieve these aims,
programmes, guided by the social partners,
the
specific characteristics and needs of each mode of transport
(initial and ongoing training) which must have the necessary
funding.

that reflect

treatment

The social
equal

for workers, whether

legislation covering road transport must
4.3.1.2
preserve
they are
employees or self-employed and, therefore, Directive 15/2002 of
11 March 2002, on the organisation of working time of
persons performing mobile road transport activities must apply
immediately to self-employed workers, without a transitional
period, since the aim of this Directive is to ensure road safety,
to avoid distortion of competition and to promote better
working conditions.

For the reasons given above, commercial vehicles of less than
3.5 tonnes used for freight services should be included in the
different regulations covering goods transport by road,

(5) See EESC own-initiative opinion: Europe's accessibility by sea in the
future: developments and how to anticipate them, OJ C 151,
28.6.2005.

C 161/94

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

13.7.2007

4.3.2
Passenger rights: strengthening users' rights is essential
to ensuring that all modes of transport improve the quality of
their service, (including frequency, punctuality, the comfort of
ticketing, prevention of over-
all categories of user, safety,
booking, pricing policy and compensation etc.). The Committee
urges that these changes be introduced as soon as possible,
whilst taking into account each mode's specific characteristics,
especially those of modes which have to share infrastructure.

4.3.2.1
The Committee welcomes the particular attention
that the review of the White Paper pays to access to transport
for persons with reduced mobility and to the quality of such
transport. It wishes to state, however, that conditions of access
concern not only modes of transport but also infrastructure,
whether for air, sea, inland waterway, rail or road transport and
also the particular problems arising from trans-shipment.

4.3.3
Safety: the introduction of a comprehensive set of regu-
lations has resulted in improved safety in all modes of transport,
especially in air and maritime transport. These measures include
the introduction of a blacklist of unsafe airlines and the creation
of European agencies for all modes of transport, including the
European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA), the European Air
Safety Agency (EASA) and the European Railway Agency (ERA).
The only exception is road transport. In order to achieve the
stated aim of halving the number of accidents, a common road
safety policy is therefore needed, establishing a common system
of standardising offences and sanctions, and introducing the
‘European penalty points driving licence’, which would enable
any offence,
in penalty
points.

in any EU Member State,

to result

2001 Transport White Paper, there is a need for investment and
transport plans to improve the quality of public transport in the
large congested conurbations, along the lines of the CIVITAS
initiative, the TranSUrban project (6) and the Thematic Strategy
on the Urban Environment (7), which should receive more finan-
cing from Community funds, whilst fully respecting the prin-
ciple of subsidiarity, because urban transport is an area for
which local and regional authorities should logically be respon-
sible. These measures will prove inadequate, however, without
an urban transport policy that makes it possible and easier to
involve private enterprise in the provision of public urban
passenger transport services, which will help free up and opti-
mise the use of public resources.

4.4 Transport and Energy

4.4.1
Transport is one of the main consumers of energy and
accounts for approximately 70 % of the EU's total oil consump-
tion, with road transport using the most (60 %), owing largely
to the stock of privately-owned vehicles, which equates to over
465 saloon cars per 1 000 inhabitants. Air transport accounts
for approximately 9 % of oil consumption and the rail sector
uses approximately 1 %. Fair competition between different
modes of transport requires equal taxation of oil consumption.
Consequently, removal of the non-taxable status of aviation fuel
must be considered.

4.3.3.1
It should not be overlooked, however, that technical
progress, new vehicle design, vehicle-infrastructure cooperation
(known as eSafety) and better infrastructure, by eliminating black
spots, are all factors that will contribute to improving road
safety.

Reducing dependency on fossil fuels and reducing CO2
4.4.2
emissions must therefore be priorities. To achieve these aims, —
the Commission estimates that transport has an energy savings
potential of 26 % by 2020, (8) — a properly funded R&D and
innovation programme must be drawn up, which can promote
the use of alternative energies (9), especially in the area of urban
surface transport.

4.3.3.2
The EESC wishes to state that road accident statistics
should be broken down by mode, especially those which come
into contact with private cars, because it is these which have the
highest accident rate.

4.3.4
Security: air transport security was tightened following
the events of 11 September 2001. The Committee considers
that, in the wake of the Madrid and London attacks and the
ongoing terrorist threat, protecting all transport resources and
infrastructure must be a priority for the Union. Security regula-
tions must therefore be extended to all modes of transport, and
to intermodal chains. When introducing security inspections
and rules, however, care must be taken to avoid unnecessary
and costly checks and to safeguard users' human rights and
privacy.

Urban transport: the Commission plans to publish a
4.3.5
Green Paper on urban transport. This must focus on the promo-
tion of public transport and contain a list of best practices.
Furthermore, as the Committee stated in its Opinion on the

4.4.3
A differentiated transport policy is needed to promote
the exploitation of new technological advances that help to
reduce CO2 emissions and oil dependency, focusing on taxation
and promotion of the acquisition and use of new technologies
that can reduce pollution and increase energy savings. A specific
fuel for public transport must also be introduced, with a lower
rate of taxation exclusively for this type of less-polluting vehicle
(Euro IV and in future Euro V), as exists for other modes of
transport. The approach to environmental issues must not be
based on punitive taxation. Quite the opposite is required, in
other words, to prioritise transport that makes use of new tech-
nologies designed to reduce pollution and save energy.

(6) TranSUrban (Transit Systems Development for Urban Regeneration) —
project supported by the EU under Interreg III (inter-regional coopera-
tion programme).

(7) See the Commission Communication on the Thematic Strategy on the

Urban Environment — COM(2005) 718 of 11 January 2006.

(8) Commission Communication entitled Action Plan for Energy Effi-

ciency: Realising the Potential — COM(2006) 545.

(9) See EESC own-initiative opinion on The development and promotion
of alternative fuels for road transport in the EU OJ C 195, 18.8.2006,
p. 75.

13.7.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 161/95

4.5 Optimising infrastructure

The trans-European Transport Networks (TENs) provide
4.5.1
infrastructure for the internal market, but their
the physical
levels of development vary across the EU and congestion is not
a problem everywhere.

4.5.2
The Committee supports the idea of co-modal logistics
chains as a more efficient solution to congested road corridors,
which optimise the use of transport infrastructure within and
across the different modes,
including transalpine tunnels, rail
corridors and intermodal transport nodes.

The problems arising from the remoteness of periph-
4.5.3
eral or ultra-peripheral regions and countries must be reiterated.
To ensure that these areas located far from the centre of the EU
can benefit fully from the internal market, the Trans-European
Transport Networks must be completed within the agreed dead-
lines. This will require increasing the funding that the EU has
earmarked for developing the most congested already-existing
networks, especially cross-border links. The Commission gives
the examples of bottlenecks in the Pyrenees, Spain-France links
and the Alps. In short, improving accessibility leads to improved
competitiveness as well as greater expectations for regional
development.

4.5.4
Together with the above budget increases, the European
Union must make a firm commitment to promoting the mixed-
financing system of infrastructure provision, which offers stabi-
lity and legal guarantees for the involvement of private capital
in building and operating transport infrastructure.

4.6 Intelligent mobility

4.6.1
As described above, intelligent transport systems help
to ensure a more efficient and rational use of infrastructure and
therefore to reduce accidents and congestion and to protect the
environment.

4.6.2
The European satellite navigation system, Galileo,
which will be operational as of 2010, will provide future appli-
cations for all modes of
transport, such as the Intelligent
Car (10), promoting the new technologies in vehicles, the SESAR
programme, which will help to improve air traffic management

Brussels, 15 March 2007.

in the single European sky, and the ERTMS system, which will
enhance interoperability between national rail networks.

4.6.3
The EESC fully supports the co-modality approach, as
transport's response to the phenomenon of globalisation and
the opening-up of world markets. Building on this approach
will require adapting infrastructure, so that interconnections are
boosted to permit transport continuity and to avoid delays and
breaks in the logistics chain. Promoting co-modality will help to
strengthen all modes of transport, especially ones that may be
currently underused.

4.7 The global dimension

4.7.1
The EESC reiterates what it has already stated in its
opinion on the 2001 White Paper (11), to the effect that interna-
tional transport policy is an integral part of trade policy and
even, in some respects, of the Common Foreign and Security
Policy (CFSP). It thus believes that in this area the Commission
should have powers similar to those conferred on it by the Trea-
in
ties for the negotiation of international trade agreements,
that, acting on the mandate of the Council, it should represent,
where possible, the Union on questions of transport in all inter-
national organisations competent on transport policy issues and
should have the power to negotiate transport agreements with
third countries on behalf of the Member States.

At the same time, the Committee considers it crucial to
4.7.2
work on simplifying customs procedures so that, without
impairing service quality (12), the costs of providing the service
are not increased, as well as to guarantee the principles applying
to internal EU frontiers, e.g. under agreements such as Schengen
or any subsequent agreements.

The president

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Dimitris DIMITRIADIS

(10) Communication on the Intelligent Car Initiative — Raising Awareness
of ICT for Smarter, Safer and Cleaner Vehicles — COM(2006) 59.

(11) OJ C 241, 7.10.2002.
(12) See EESC opinion on the Proposal for a Decision of the European
Parliament and of the Council establishing an action programme for
customs in the Community (Customs 2013), OJ C 324, 31.12.2006,
p. 78.

C 161/96

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

13.7.2007

APPENDIX

to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee

The following text of the revised draft opinion was rejected in favour of an amendment adopted by the assembly but
obtained at least one-quarter of the votes cast:

Point 4.6.4

‘Where goods transport logistics are concerned, the EESC proposes that restrictions on traffic at specific times set by national authorities
be replaced with restrictions that the Union can coordinate, which would require the adoption of Community rules in this area. This
measure would need to be coordinated with the declaration of a minimum trans-European road network free of such restrictions, on
which road traffic could move without interruptions.’

Outcome of the vote:

82 for amending the point, 72 against and 9 abstentions.