Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-04-20-Speech-2-047"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040420.3.2-047"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, Commissioner de Palacio, ladies and gentlemen, as the Commissioner has mentioned, it is important not just, and not so much, to highlight the significance of this proposal for a directive, within the framework of developing a European strategy for transport systems, but also to mention that it is not the first time that the Commission, the European Parliament and the Council itself have dealt with matters relating to the transport system and transport networks and expressed their views with specific pronouncements on them and with reference to the external costs involved in their use and the associated, problematic issue of transport infrastructure charges.
As regards the reference to Parliament’s contribution, certain points were highlighted on all of these occasions in the conclusions linked to individual reports and speeches: the need first of all to harmonise transport charges in all Member States to consolidate the single European market; the opportunity for a transformation – if not a radical one in some cases, then one that is objective and realistic at all times and, in any case, challenging – of the charging structure with a view to internalising the external costs of transport, which are often overlooked when decisions are made concerning the transport mode and, therefore, omitted from infrastructure completion strategies. Also highlighted was the need, in any case, to create a system of tariffs tallying with transport infrastructure use; the need to establish homogenous mechanisms for calculating the costs of each mode of transport and clearly comparing the Member States; and, finally, the need, to equip governments with transport policy instruments based on infrastructure costs so as to encourage the use of transport modes with less environmental impact and, above all, to allow for new investments in infrastructure and, in future, to complete the plan for fully implementing the major infrastructure projects for the trans-European transport networks that are also suffering from problems of financial cover. This was mentioned a short while ago and we are, moreover, all aware of it.
At this stage, therefore, the governments of the Member States must address two separate issues. On the one hand, there is an increasingly urgent need to invest huge resources to satisfy the demand for transport infrastructures. On the other hand, the Member States must tackle the costs – including social costs – involved in the growth of mobility, from increased air and noise pollution to environmental problems, and above all increased congestion and rising accident rates. I cannot call to mind the figures relating to this outlook, which must also be seen in the context of enlargement and of the expected increase in demand that, as always, must be met.
This is not just an issue of external costs. We know that often the construction of infrastructures and the operation of the transport system have been funded primarily from general taxation. Today, however, the new approach to the sphere of public sector activity, the ceilings on the Member States’ budgets and policies for the privatisation of services, make it essential also to have recourse to private-sector capital to finance the construction of infrastructures, even if it means sacrificing a plan for completion.
I would just like to mention that if this all has to take place outside of a plan – which is acceptable to no one – of detrimentally penalising road transport, it will be necessary to guarantee alternatives because the single incentive of toll charging or the measure relating to costs would not constitute an answer to the problem, in the absence of real and competitive alternatives to redirect a proportion of the volume of traffic. Instead, in terms of costs, it would exacerbate the forced use of this infrastructure and would have general economic consequences. This is why we have tried to give guidelines and find solutions to the most sensitive and difficult aspects of the problem through the cost financing instrument, and to divert an additional set of resources to accelerate the implementation of such projects.
I will conclude by lamenting the fact that a delay on this due to internal positions in the Council will today prevent a complete result. In order to achieve one, I believe that strengthening Parliament’s position could play a major role in the future development of negotiations and, to this end, I must thank all the groups and all the Members for their valuable cooperation in the work at this stage, at least in view of the objective of bringing the first reading of the report to a positive conclusion."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples