TRANS-EUROPEAN TRANSPORT NETWORKS
Exchange of views with Mr Van Miert, Chair of the High Level Group on TEN-T &
Mr Lunardi, Chairman in office of Council of Transport Ministers
European Parliament’s Transport Committee – Tuesday 8 July
Background
The Commission is expected to publish a proposal for a revision of the Trans-European Transport Networks (TEN-T) at the end of 2003. A High Level group, chaired by Karel Van Miert, published a report on 30 June to assist the Commission with the preparation of the TEN-T guidelines revision. The Italian Presidency has stated that it will “give a central place” to the development of the TEN-T during its six-month term.
Environmental NGOs welcome the Transport Committee’s exchange of views with Mr Van Miert and Mr Lunardi on Tuesday 8 July. We believe that these debates provide an important opportunity for MEPs to raise questions about the direction of the EU’s TEN-T policy, particularly in terms of transport sustainability and the implementation of EU environmental legislation.
Why is the revision of the TEN-T of importance to the environment?
The TEN-T has, in the past, created environmental problems, such as the destruction of habitats and promotion of unsustainable forms of transport. However, Environmental NGOs believe that next year’s revision of the TEN-T has the potential to improve transport sustainability in Europe considerably. This can be achieved by ensuring that key principles such as ‘decoupling’, Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA), cost-benefit analysis and environmental integration are placed at the heart of the revision process.
What are the concerns regarding the current development of the TEN-T?
NGO concerns with regard to the current development of the TEN-T include:
· Key principles such as cost-benefit analysis, ‘decoupling’ and Strategic Environmental Assessment have been sidelined in the TEN-T process. The TEN-T has therefore not promoted sustainable development.
· The focus has shifted away from the TEN-T priorities to pure investment objectives. The functioning of the single market was assumed to require additional infrastructure when the network was designed. The assumption that increased infrastructure leads to increased economic growth is, however, seriously flawed. The current revision focuses on filling ‘missing links’ instead of rethinking the whole system.
· Investment in the Accession Countries has focused on building new infrastructure rather than maintaining existing transport networks. The Transport Infrastructure Needs Assessment (TINA) process, which sets the agenda for the extension of the TEN-T to Central and Eastern Europe, has failed to maximise the potential of existing infrastructure in the Accession Countries.
· TEN-T extension to the Accession Countries is likely to lead to the destruction of precious habitats requiring protection under EC law. The TINA network could affect a number of sites requiring protection under the EU’s Birds and Habitats Directives, eg. the Biebrza National Park in Poland. No Strategic Environmental Assessment of the TINA network has been undertaken.
The report of the ‘Van Miert’ High Level group (30 June 2003)
In response to the ‘Van Miert’ High Level report published on 30 June, Environmental NGOs wish to highlight several important issues:
Transport sustainability:
The report starts from the assumption that there has been an under-investment in transport infrastructure. NGOs disagree with this. There has indeed been a lack of investment in maintaining the existing infrastructure, but this should not be used as an argument in favour of building additional capacity. In addition, the report mentions the increasing levels of traffic, but fails to recommend traffic -demand management measures as a priority for managing the TEN-T.
In terms of pricing, the High Level group’s proposals do not recognise the role of pricing as a tool for internalising the environmental costs of transport, but only recommend that it should be used as a levy for TEN-T funding. Although one of the selection criteria for the projects refers to size and European added value, there has been no thorough cost-benefit analysis of TEN-T network. Such a lack of assessment could lead to significant costs, including opportunity costs from less investment-intensive alternatives.
Compatibility of the TEN-T with EU environment legislation:
We welcome the emphasis placed in the report on the importance of taking all necessary steps to comply with the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and the Habitats Directives. Compliance with these Directives should not be seen as an obstacle to the development of the TEN-T, but rather as a vital aspect of the process of ensuring that the TEN-T contributes to the sustainable development of an enlarged Europe.
A number of sites requiring protection under EU nature conservation Directives are likely to be negatively affected by several of the priority projects. However, there has been no full environmental assessment of the proposed projects. In addition, there is no reference in the report to the need to respect the provisions of the EU’s Water Framework Directive when developing inland waterways and “Motorways of the Sea”. NGOs are concerned that the conclusions of the High Level report will accelerate decisions regarding investment in priority transport projects before the Member States and Accession Countries have fully complied with environmental legislation.
Transparency and public participation:
NGOs are disappointed about the lack of transparency and openness in the drawing up of the High Level report. We hope that sufficient time will now be allowed for a full public consultation on the TEN-T revision process.
According to the High Level Group proposals, the European Investment Bank (EIB) will be the main provider of new funds for transport projects. The Bank needs to improve considerably its transparency as well as its capacity to assess and the monitor environmental impacts of investment, before being given this new role.
What are the key recommendations for improvements to the TEN-T?
NGO have several key recommendations for improvements to current TEN-T policy, which we believe must be fully integrated into the proposal for a revision of the TEN-T that will be published later in the year:
· A full Strategic Environmental Assessment of the whole network (TEN-T and TINA) must be carried out – coordinated by the Commission, with the full cooperation of the Member States. This is vital to ensure that negative environmental impacts are minimised.
· Local networks must be prioritised. Local and regional transport systems should be maintained and improved, before national and EU funds are allocated to trans-national transport infrastructure.
· Cost-benefit analysis must be improved. The TEN-T revision should make consideration of the ‘zero’ option compulsory. Improved methods of cost-benefit analysis must be developed.
· Transport growth and GDP growth must be decoupled. The Community’s Sixth Environmental Action Programme and the conclusions of the Gothenburg EU Council set as an objective the significant decoupling of transport growth from economic growth. The TEN-T guidelines should refer to this objective.
· Integrate the needs of the Natura 2000 network into the TEN-T. The Natura 2000 network of sites designated under the EU Habitats and Birds Directives protects Europe’s most important areas for wildlife. There must be no net loss to the ecological integrity of the Natura 2000 network as a result of transport infrastructure developments.
· The TEN-T guidelines revision must fully respect the provisions of the Water Framework Directive. Particular attention should be paid to provisions concerning prevention of further deterioration of water quality and the achievement of good ecological and chemical status for all waters.
· The European Investment Bank (EIB) should not be given a new mandate to provide a special fund for TEN-T until it improves its access to information and environmental procedures. The EIB should present a set of clear rules allowing affected citizens to get timely access to project information. The Bank must also increase its capacity to verify the environmental impacts of its investments, and not leave this entirely up to the project promoter.
For further information, please contact:
T&E:Nicoleta Ion
Tel: +32 2 5029909 / BirdLife International:
Zoltan Waliczky/Victoria Phillips
Tel: +44 (0) 1767 680551 or +44 (0) 7803 151132 / WWF
Ellen Townsend
Tel: +32-2-740-0921
/ CEE Bankwatch Network/Friends of the Earth Europe
Magda Stoczkiewicz
Tel: +31 20 622 13 69