European transport policies
Doc. 7506
20 March 1996
REPORT [1]
Reply to the 40th and 41st Annual Reports of the European Conference of Ministers of Transport (ECMT))
Rapporteur: Mr PAVLIDIS, Greece, Group of the European People's Party
Summary:
The report - drawn up every second year to comment on the activities of the European Conference of Ministers of Transport and European transport issues generally - welcomes the ECMT's increasingly pan-European membership, which largely overlaps with that of the Council of Europe.
The report notes the crucial importance of adequate transport links for Europe's economic growth and calls on the ECMT to seek continent-wide solutions and integration of different transport modes - roads, railways, inland waterways, short sea shipping and maritime transport - in full respect of the need to protect the environment and the quality of life of citizens, and working closely with the European Union and other institutions concerned.
Links need to be not only east-west, but also north-south, including in central and eastern Europe. Finally the report stresses the need to enhance road safety, and suggests that the ECMT's joint projects with the Council of Europe in this field be pursued.
I. Draft resolution
1. The Assembly has taken note of the 40th and 41st Annual Reports of the European Conference of Ministers of Transport (ECMT) (Docs. 7211 and 7452) covering 1993 and 1994 respectively.
2. The Assembly welcomes the expanding circle of ECMT member states, now standing at thirty-one, as well as associate members and observers. The Assembly, in recognition of the primordial importance of transport for economic development, hopes that the ECMT may soon bring together all European countries in a quest for joint strategies.
3. With the overcoming of the divisions between Europe's different parts, the continent has a unique opportunity to seek Europe-wide solutions to its transport problems. The Assembly welcomes the ECMT's efforts to work closely with the European Union towards this end. Such co-operation must ensure adequate transport links with and among countries at present outside the European Union, including north-south routes in central and eastern Europe.
4. The Assembly considers that the organisation should accord particular priority to the improvement of the transport systems in central and eastern Europe and their integration with those of the rest of the continent; the reconciliation of transport needs with the protection of the environment and the quality of life; and the easing of congestion in road traffic through greater use of other modes of transport, such as collective urban transport, railways, inland waterways and maritime transport, especially short sea shipping.
5. The Assembly regrets that investment by ECMT member countries in transport infrastructure has, for many years, been insufficient to meet rising demand, and fears that this may already negatively affect economic growth. This holds not only for congestion on roads but also for the railways, which merit as much support as other modes of transport and where an efficient European-wide passenger and freight network presupposes a bolder co-operation among national authorities.
6. The Assembly encourages the ECMT to explore Europe's possibility to exploit fully its potential for water transport - inland water ways, short sea shipping and maritime transport - thereby reducing the burden of land transport, especially on roads.
7. Recognising the overall lack of co-ordination of European land, water and air transport policies, the Assembly calls for co-operation as close as possible between the ECMT and, in particular, the European Union, the European Civil Aviation Conference and sea and inland water transport authorities concerned, especially regarding the areas of interface between various modes of transport, such as connections at airports and ports or in the development of high-speed trains.
8. The Assembly strongly supports the ECMT's special efforts to assist countries of central and eastern Europe in building up and modernising their transport system.
9. The Assembly welcomes the ECMT's efforts to limit the damage caused by transport to the environment and the quality of life, including the special case of the Alpine region. In particular it considers that the transport investments made or planned to protect the Alpine environment point the way to a more harmonious, global and environmentally sound integration of different modes of transport.
10. The Assembly specifically welcomes the ECMT's recommendation for limiting transport-related pollution, especially CO2 emissions, and recalls the urgency of policies designed to halt global warming.
11. The Assembly welcomes the co-operation between the Council of Europe and the ECMT in many practical projects relating to road safety, the most recent being the 1994 joint Conference on "Road Safety Education for Young Children and Teenagers".
12. More specifically, the Assembly calls on ECMT and Council of Europe member states:
i. to implement ECMT recommendations to enhance road safety, including better school education as emphasised in the above-mentioned 1994 Council of Europe-ECMT Conference on road safety;
ii. to speed up the introduction of electronic data processing to assist traffic management, and in particular to ensure "inter-operability" between different national systems and different transport systems;
iii. to harmonise working conditions in the transport sector in all ECMT countries, in the interest of traffic safety and fair competition - in particular as concerns lorry and bus transport - and to examine the possibility of a joint ECMT-Council of Europe project concentrating on the social aspects of this issue;
iv. to work together in favour of the implementation, as a matter of priority, of transport projects to which the European Union is already committed and which have been established in close co-operation with the ECMT, on the understanding that they are to serve Europe as a whole.
II. Explanatory Memorandum
by Mr PAVLIDIS
Contents
I. Introduction. General challenges. The evolution of the ECMT.
II. Central and eastern Europe
III. Road traffic harmonisation and liberalisation
VII. Transport, the environment and the quality of life
VIII. Transport infrastructure
I. Introduction. General challenges. The evolution of the ECMT.
This report takes as its point of departure the 1993 Annual Report of the ECMT. It also builds on the conclusions reached in the Assembly's previous report on ECMT activities in 1991 and 1992 (Resolution 1023 (1994); Doc. 6978; Rapporteur: Mr Efraimoglou). However, it is essentially forward-oriented in that it tries to identify the major challenges to Europe in the transport field in the years and decades ahead.
In preparing the report the Rapporteur has been greatly helped by discussions with the ECMT's Secretary General, Mr G. Aurbach, and his senior staff at the Organisation's headquarters in Paris in the spring of 1995. Mr Aurbach appeared before the Committee in November 1995 to present the organisation's activities. Finally, the Assembly looks forward to receiving for its debate on this issue, in April 1996, Mr Karoly Lotz, Chairman of the ECMT Ministerial Council and Minister of Transport, Communications and Water Management of Hungary, all the more so as he is a former Vice-Chairman of the Committee on Economic Affairs and Development.
It may be useful at this stage to recall a few facts concerning the ECMT. It is an intergovernmental organisation created, with the support of the Parliamentary Assembly, in 1953 as a forum for co-operation for European Ministers of Transport in all fields of their competence, excluding air and maritime transport. The Assembly has served as the parliamentary forum of the ECMT for many decades, and in this way seeks to make ECMT's activities better known while at the same time providing parliamentary impetus to its work.
The membership of the ECMT is expanding rapidly. After the acceptance of the Czech Republic, Slovakia (these countries being the successors to Czechoslovakia) and Bosnia-Herzegovina at the meeting of ECMT ministers in Noordwijk, The Netherlands, in May 1993, Moldova joined the organisation in May 1994 while Russia became an associate member and Albania was granted observer status. In June 1995, at the ECMT Ministerial Council meeting in Vienna, Armenia, Belarus and Georgia became observers.[2] The enlarged membership highlights the special role played by the ECMT in the process of shaping a pan-European transport policy.
This ECMT role is the main reason justifying the (still pending for approval) applications from a number of other countries to become full or associate members (Cyprus) or to be granted observer status (Azerbaijan). Meanwhile, three European countries - Iceland, Cyprus and Malta which are members of the Council of Europe - are not yet members of ECMT, a fact which might be detrimental to the aims of the Conference, or to the European Union to which two of them are candidate members. The fact that they are island countries does not change this circumstance, since in the modern transport world there are no closed compartments, as witnessed for instance by the United Kingdom and Irish membership in the ECMT.
Since the Assembly's last report on ECMT's activities (Resolution 1023 (1994); Doc. 6978), Europe has undergone further profound transformation with consequences also for the transport sector.
Thus, the countries of central and eastern Europe continued their efforts to improve the democratic functioning of their societies and to strengthen their market economies. Three countries - Austria, Finland and Sweden - joined the European Union, thereby expanding the geographical scope of the "acquis communautaire" in the transport sector. At the level of the European Union, important decisions were taken at the European Council meeting in Essen in December 1994, especially in respect of trans-European transport networks.
A number of EU countries have adhered to the so-called Schengen Agreement abolishing border controls between them (while others for various reasons decided to stay outside). The Agreement - whatever challenges it creates for some - has the potential of greatly enhancing transport efficiency.
Other EU priority projects include road and railway corridors in central and eastern Europe, as defined jointly with the ECMT and adopted by the Second Pan-European Conference on Transport. The Union has concluded Europe Agreements with several central and eastern European members, and a Co-operation Agreement with Russia, all meant to promote overall growth. Recently we also witnessed the successful start of one of the most ambitious transport projects of this century - the Channel Tunnel railway crossing between France and the United Kingdom.
Finally, technological progress in all fields - such as in transport economics, telecommunications and computers - affects Europe like all the other parts of the world in ways that we still understand only poorly.
Special emphasis will be placed in this report on central and eastern Europe, for its integration into the rest of the European transport system remains a priority task. The report will also raise the evolution of road, railway and inland waterway traffic in Europe, and will conclude by commenting on road safety and the protection of the environment as it relates to transport.
Three major groups of problems face European politicians and regional planners in the transport area. The first concerns major international "transport corridors", and the need for massive investments to meet the transport demands of tomorrow. Secondly, should governments simply maintain or modernise existing infrastructures, or should they build new ones? Generally speaking, since the transport system consists of a large number of components which are in constant change and interaction with each other, what matters most is the establishment of clear priorities to achieve the best possible result with limited means. Finally, there is the problem of choosing between different modes of transport, and in particular whether priority should be given to rail or road transport.
In fact, Europe stands before considerable problems in the transport sector, partly due to the policies pursued, or rather not pursued, by governments in recent years. These policies have been almost exclusively guided by user demand, leading to an explosive growth in road transport with more and more critical congestion problems all over Europe. The lack of fair competition among transport operators in different countries has led to an inability on the part of governments to control traffic growth, and in particular to promote less polluting modes of transport.
The consequences of this development are already visible on all fronts: growing saturation of the road network, road accidents which are very costly to society, noise and air pollution. If policy makers do not succeed in finding an acceptable compromise between economic interests and the respect for people who suffer from the noise and pollution of transport, then goods transported by road risk running into extremely strong resistance by citizens.
The way out must lie in greater competitiveness on the part of rail, water and combined transport, greater equality in the ability to compete as between different modes of transport, greater respect for the needs of populations affected by passing road traffic, and the adoption at European level of technical safety norms and environmental standards which are exacting and binding.
II. Central and eastern Europe
The Second Pan-European Transport Conference, held in Crete in March 1994, concluded with a Declaration recommending measures to facilitate the integration of the central and eastern European countries. A subsequent Resolution, adopted by ECMT Ministers at their May 1994 meeting in Annecy, set out a number of more concrete steps to be taken by the Conference with regard to its new member countries. Actions to be taken concern, more specifically, traffic tendencies, infrastructure needs and the resulting financial problems, as well as the introduction of a pan-European transport policy. Meanwhile, the countries of central and eastern Europe are making a considerable effort to cooperate in the transport field. Some projects have already been started, and they should be strongly supported with adequate funds.
One contribution the ECMT could make is to help its new member countries integrate themselves into the European Transport System, and to serve as a bridge between the European Union and other countries in Europe, needless to say in close coordination with other international organisations concerned.
Development of links between East and West and between North and South is essential for the economic development of the countries of central and eastern Europe. The current regulatory systems between the regions, and even within them, are, however, so varied as to make harmonisation difficult, for instance as regards market access, competition, safety and environmental standards. A large number of barriers exist which considerably limit the ability of central and eastern European countries to participate in the west European transport market.
Thus, an Estonian member of the Committee on Economic Affairs and Development mentioned the existence of outright threats against transporters wishing to transport goods across international borders in his region. He also maintained that the Kaliningrad enclave on the southern shore of the Baltic had virtually been closed for transit transport, obliging transporters to make a costly detour. The Rapporteur is asking the ECMT to look into these and related allegations since, if they are true, they risk compromising trade and economic development in all the countries concerned.
The transport network in central and eastern Europe results from the earlier trade relationships among CMEA countries, dominated by the former Soviet Union. For instance, there is no coherent motorway network because rail transport was given priority and road haulage was rarely allowed for long-distance transport. National trunk road networks often have a "radial" structure, with a capital or major cities as their hubs.
International roads were mostly oriented north-south or in the direction of the Soviet Union. As a result, the increasing traffic at the borders with western Europe and in many capitals and large cities has caused severe problems of congestion. One promising development has been the approval at the 1994 conference, of the need of a direct road link between Helsinki and Alexandroupolis and Crete (so called "the ninth (Crete) corridor")
Furthermore, some road links are missing, in the East-West and in the North-South direction. This latter shortcoming was already unanimously recognised in the Assembly's Resolution 1023 (1994) which called on the ECMT and Council of Europe member states to "work in favour of Europe-wide solutions to the continent's transport issues - in particular avoiding any split between European Union members and other European countries - and to develop a general investment plan for a pan-European railway system". It is to be noted that there are still no ECMT decisions for solving great traffic problems between North and South East European countries, namely between Baltic countries and Poland on the one hand and Romania, Bulgaria and Greece on the other hand. In this respect, the materialisation, on a priority basis, of the Trans-European transport Networks should be seen as the major process to achieve the set target, given that the European Union has already created the necessary tools to facilitate the financial needs of the projects relating to the corresponding corridors.
The railway network, by contrast, is relatively well developed (although slow because many components are rather obsolete), with appropriate East-West linkages. However, capacity problems are due to insufficient maintenance or inefficient use, in particular at border crossings. The considerably larger railway network of the former Soviet Union area and the Baltic States (as well as Finland) is also based on a rail gauge which differs from that in the majority of countries in western Europe. It requires extensive technology to achieve either reloading at the borders or gauge changes on railway cars.
Waterways play a limited role in inland transport in central and eastern Europe, especially as a result of the only recently resolved conflict in the former Yugoslavia. Maritime transport is an important means of transport in certain regions. This holds for the countries on the Baltic Sea, which have an extensive network of ferry connections with Scandinavia and Germany, but also for links across the Black Sea. The Black Sea is of particular importance to countries like Bulgaria and Romania, which use these sea links to ease the difficulties in land transport due to the still problematic transport situation in the former Yugoslavia area and the high transit fees observed by certain transit countries. Certain countries along the northern Mediterranean also use more sea transport for the same reason.
Several countries in eastern and central Europe are making strong attempts to modernise their railway network. For example, Poland, Germany, Russia and Belarus have started talks on modernising their railways with the goal of slashing nine hours from the passenger journey between Berlin and Moscow. Poland plans to modernise its E20 railway route, running east-west from the German to the Belarus border, to allow speeds of 160 kilometres an hour for passenger trains and 120 kilometres for cargo trains by around the year 2000.
The development of rail-based inter-modal transport is often viewed in European policy-making circles as an important means to halt the decline of railways while responding to environmental concerns. Combined transport should and will grow considerably, but it will do so from a very modest base and it is likely to remain very small in the total transport picture. It is unlikely that it will exceed 5% of total freight transport. The central and eastern European countries have developed a system where railways play a predominant role. This concept could form the basis for the future development of combined transport.
The decline in "bulk traffic", ie the transport of high-volume primary materials, has hit central and eastern European railways quite hard as these countries' economies are restructured and expanded toward the western European and world markets. This is due in particular to the reorientation of the economy, and to the development of new activities modelled on those of western Europe and characterised more by less bulky intermediate products with higher value-added. As average haul distances in these countries are, in general, short (on a par with western Europe), the prospects that railways will capture anything but a minor share of the growing volumes of high-value freight are poor. The loss of traffic will have a significant impact on profits, as fixed infrastructure costs are spread over fewer traffic units. The ability of the railways to generate sufficient revenues to cover the cost of renewal and modernisation, even the minimum necessary to meet the reduced demands, will be limited.
In sum, the railways in central and eastern Europe, as well as other modes, will be operating in a physical and economic environment increasingly similar over time to that of western Europe, and the outlook for long-term transport solutions there is similar to that for western Europe, assuming similar overall policies are pursued, for instance as regards competition. The main difference, at least over the next decade or two, is likely to be that in central and eastern Europe lower per capita incomes will slow down the development of the demand for higher-quality passenger services, although that for cars will soar. Roads will become a much more important mode of transport, and the cost of building a modern road network can be shared among the rapidly growing number of trucks and private cars.
There will be a socially painful, although perhaps economically and financially unavoidable, downscaling of the rail sector, but its extent will depend on how imaginative and aggressive the railways are in their marketing and investment policies, and on the political will to influence the choice between different modes of transport. It is important to keep in mind that the demand for transport is nothing "independent", but that it follows from increasing economic development, in central and eastern Europe as elsewhere. If we want that development to continue, which we of course fervently do, then we must ensure timely installation of the needed services and infrastructure. In the case of railways, which in central and eastern Europe have been left without any noteworthy investment for decades, a clear set of priorities must be established. It is not possible to modernise everything at once. Countries must decide what place to afford their railways in the overall transport market of the future, and what improvements are therefore necessary. Examples could be frontier connections, rolling stock, signal systems or telematics.
III. Road traffic harmonisation and liberalisation
It is one of the paradoxes of road transport that it is normally the mode of transport best suited to meet the transport needs of individuals, while placing a greater strain on society in terms of congestion and environmental damage than other alternatives. The increasing number of vehicles - cars and trucks - suggest a higher demand for roads than government plans seem ready to recognise. Apart from environmental and safety issues which will be referred to later, road traffic involve at least three important issues:
- passenger transport and investments in road infrastructure;
- harmonisation and liberalisation of road goods transport under the ECMT multilateral quota system; and
- combined transport (road/rail, road/waterways etc)
Passenger transport is still dominated by the private car. Cars grant unprecedented mobility to individuals. They make it easier to live in residential areas remote from cities. Insufficient urban planning and poor public transport systems in many countries, even in richer European economies, bring about an even greater utilisation of cars. However, as time goes by, car users and others realise the negative effects of too many cars - congestion, pollution, noise and more accidents.
A further rise in the number of cars is therefore all but certain, not least in the rising economies around the world, and this of course includes central and eastern Europe, even though the scale of future growth does not seem quite certain in Western Europe, as shown in a recent seminar organised by the ECMT in cooperation with the International Organisation of Car Manufacturers. However, consumer behaviour is not yet fully understood. This makes it difficult to arrive at a political solution, at national or European level, in order to modify transport behaviour in the direction of a greater role for eg public transport. Worth recalling in this context is the favourable situation in central and eastern Europe as regards urban transport, which is on the whole well developed. It would seem appropriate not to sacrifice this advantage on the altar of the privately owned car.
A Dutch member of the Committee on Economic Affairs and Development, and an expert on the traffic situation in his country, called for political action to try to change people's travelling behaviour, including the times of day or week chosen for travelling. He pointed to the absurdity of everybody using the same roads at exactly the same hour, mornings, evenings and weekends, and suggested that various price and other incentives could be used to spread out travel over time. The Rapporteur would encourage the ECMT to look further into this issue.
Solutions are not any easier to reach in the road goods transport sector. Transport in general, and highly flexible road transport in particular, are an essential prerequisite for economic development, in Europe as elsewhere. Here, however, it is the international dimension that is the thorniest, for as goods are exchanged between countries they have to cross borders. For peripheral countries we are talking about a great number of borders, including the well-known problem of transit.
At its session in Annecy in 1994, the Council of Transport Ministers approved the report on "Removal of Obstacles at Border Crossings for International Road Goods Transport". Unfortunately, the implementation of guidelines to facilitate frontier passage for goods unanimously agreed upon is relatively slow at the level of ECMT member states.
The issue of transport liberalisation has been a hot topic at recent meetings in the ECMT, in 1994 to discuss the future development of the ECMT multilateral quota system, and in 1995 on the introduction of "greener" and safer lorries in Europe. The multilateral quota - essentially an agreement among ECMT member states for the mutual granting of access by foreign lorries - increased in 1993 by an unprecedented 134 per cent. However, transport governed by multilateral quota accounts for only a small proportion of the total European road transport, the rest being either unrestricted (within the EU) or bilateral permissions negotiated more or less annually.
Central and eastern European ECMT member states depend heavily, however, on such multilateral agreements. They therefore want to see the multilateral quota increased, while other countries give higher priority to social, technical and environmental harmonisation issues. Liberalisation and harmonisation are not achieved independently from one another. Alternatively, one could ask whether those countries that are reluctant to raise multilateral quota are only doing so in order to limit competition in their domestic market? Finally, in deciding on quotas greater attention should be paid to the disadvantages suffered by lorries of peripheral European countries, so that equal access to all transporters to central European markets is assured.
These latter countries experience the additional problems of limited opportunities of road transit and accessibility, and the related obstacles of an administrative, technical (weights and dimensions) and fiscal (tolls an charges) nature imposed by the countries located in-between the origins and destinations of the corresponding transport operations. Although the intensity of the problems varies with the geographical position of each peripheral country, free transit is a matter of major necessity if a consistent and fair pan-European transport policy is to be established.
The introduction of the concept of the "greener" and safer lorry in the context of the multilateral quota system is a first step in the right direction, and the ECMT is already envisaging even higher standards for a more distant future. At the same time it must be recognised that no lorry becomes altogether environmentally friendly just through the introduction of stricter environmental standards. Lorries do and always will constitute a certain environmental nuisance. This does not at all mean that "greener" lorries are not needed, only that the reasons justifying their use are not primarily environmental. Furthermore, the requirements concerning noise, exhaust emissions and safety standards are not new but lie scattered in many older or more recent regulations. Finally, the rate of replacement of older lorries with modern ones, a prerequisite to expand the "green lorry" concept, depends greatly upon the financial capabilities of the road hauliers, which in turn is directly linked with the provision of equal terms of competition and the specific obstacles (eg transit, technical, administrative, fiscal) the hauliers need to overcome to reach the international markets.
In this context, the Rapporteur welcomes the promotion of combined transport as agreed upon at the ECMT Annecy Session in 1994. Combined transport reduces congestion and accidents, and ECMT member countries should be encouraged to introduce fiscal incentives such as tax relief and investment subsidies in favour of this transport mode. In general, countries should take more determined action as regards combined transport, for in spite of many declarations in the past there has been only scant improvement in the share of this mode in overall transport. There are many reasons for this, including higher costs, as well as the prices of alternative modes of transport. However, given its many environmental and other advantages, further investments should be encouraged, for instance on "intermodal platforms"and better rolling stock.
The intensification of traffic in Europe brings up the issue of the use of new technologies. Transport telematics has already been mentioned in previous reports on ECMT activities. Unfortunately, although progress in this field is considerable, more should be done before we can speak of an efficient network in data interchange. This holds in particular for the public administration in ECMT member countries. Private enterprises have come much further.
The ECMT is pursuing projects which seek to ensure the necessary interface between different types of transport, integrated travel information and more efficient management of road traffic. The ECMT Council of Ministers, at its meeting in Annecy in 1994, decided to set up a Task Force to investigate these matters and report on ways to implement them.
The use of new technologies for the management of traffic has such important policy implications for the future that it was one of the major issues at the ECMT's Annecy meeting in May 1994. Work on telematics applications with respect to road traffic information and management, user guidance and autonomous intelligent cruise control systems has now entered a decisive phase. A number of these systems are already being marketed, and their use should increase considerably over the next few years.
These technologies recently made their appearance in the private car market. Many of the services planned or already in existence depend on equipment fitted in the vehicle itself, and may therefore have major implications as regards traffic conditions, road safety, the environment and the development of industries associated with the automobile and telecommunications sectors.
Policy co-operation between ECMT Member countries is essential if we want to avoid a situation in which individual governments, local authorities and operators create a patchwork of mutually incompatible systems. There is a real risk that European drivers will in a few years find that there is no geographical continuity between driver information and route guidance systems developed in various countries. Greater efforts should be made to find practical applications of telematics in the various transport systems (traffic management, information to drivers etc) in order to reduce, for example, congestion and accidents.
In order to favour a coherent European system, the ECMT Council of Ministers in May 1994 adopted guidelines in three areas: new information technologies in the field of transport; the political stakes and the legal and administrative implications of these new technologies; and traffic management as well as road information.
An ECMT symposium on the theme "Why do we need Railways?" was held in January 1995. In order to answer this question we politicians will first have to define the role we expect railways to play in the next century. It should be clear that, within the flexible and adaptable world of road transport, railways have a major contribution to make as part of the combined transport system. They are an environmentally friendly and economically superior means of transportation, especially for goods over long distances. Therefore, as was pointed out by various members of the Committee on Economic Affairs and Development, the 'railway versus road' issue should be seen in a complementary rather than a competitive context. The question becomes one of how we are to avoid a further decrease in the already low proportion of rail traffic in overall people and freight transport in Europe.
In this context the Rapporteur welcomes the efforts made by Austria and Switzerland to facilitate Alpine transit, and notably the Swiss NEAT (New Alpine Tunnels) project involving over 90 kilometres of new railway tunnels for combined transport, at a cost of 10 billion dollars. Such investments point the way to a harmonious and environmentally-sound integration of different modes of transport.
The Parliamentary Assembly in its Resolution 1023 (1994) on European transport problems deplored the insufficient progress made in instituting co-operation between national railway systems, with a view to ensuring an efficient, Europe-wide passenger and freight railway network. It also recalled its Resolution 977 (1992) in which it called on ECMT and Council of Europe member states to "give priority to railways over roads" within an internationally co-ordinated investment programme to improve Europe's transport infra-structure.
The railway infrastructure and services could be much more useful than at present in helping to move goods and people, and to take some of the burden off the roads. To date, three major issues dominate the discussion on railway transport:
- the implementation of a European high-speed network;
- access by third parties to the railway infrastructure and establishment of a truly competitive market;
- the privatisation of national railways.
The European high-speed system pursued its expansion with the opening of the Channel Tunnel. The effects of this project will be considerable, in spite of its current economic difficulties. It establishes a competitive alternative to the existing boat and air crossings for freight and passenger transport alike. By lowering the time and cost of crossing the channel, the new railway service will help connect people and countries and create new economic opportunities.
The Rapporteur welcomes the proposal made by the European Council meeting in Essen in 1994 to select fourteen trans-European network priority projects. They include motorways in Greece, high-speed train and combined transport connections between France and Italy, and the Berlin-Warsaw-Minsk-Moscow rail/road connection. These projects are in the common interest of all ECMT member countries, and every effort should be made to attract private investors and get the projects completed as soon as possible.
High-speed trains are an attractive alternative not only to road transport but - for passengers - also to air travel. This holds especially for distances of up to 1,200 km for daytime journeys, and up to 2,500 km for overnight travel. The high-speed train example shows that this form of transport, which can be of the highest importance to relieve road and air congestion, can also be profitable. There are many problems with high-speed trains, especially of an environmental nature. In particular, they are confronted with the problem of incompatibility between, on the one hand, the new technologies that have been developed and, on the other, the necessity to create real "inter-operability" between various networks. However, with Europe being a densely populated continent, high-speed trains can provide an alternative to Europe's overloaded roads and airspace. What matters most at the moment is to arrive at a time schedule for the realisation of a European high-speed railway network.
As regards the restructuring of the sector, the ECMT Railway Group was instructed by the 1993 ECMT Noordwijk meeting to submit a report reviewing the implementation of steps taken to "gear railway undertakings to a more competitive environment". This report was presented to the 1995 ECMT Ministerial meeting in Vienna. It is somewhat unfortunate, however, that the discussion mainly centred on the profitability of railways, presumably to be enhanced through privatisation, as opposed to other, more social, purposes they are meant to fulfil, supposedly through public ownership.
As for the European Union, efforts have been made to have national railway systems compete more effectively with other modes of transport, also in the freight market. They include a lessened role of the state in railway operations so as not to distort competition, and a greater transparency as regards the subsidies that nevertheless continue to be handed out. Progress has, however, been limited, and the very virtue of railway privatisation has not gone uncontested in countries that are trying it, such as the United Kingdom.
Privatisation, if pursued, would quite possibly result in a fragmentation of national railway networks. However, this would not necessarily prevent international cooperation and coordination. Private railway companies would be likely to be able to work across borders in much the same way as do telephone companies.
Privatisation and liberalisation will help clarify the tasks placed on railways and the political choices involved. The low and continuously shrinking share of railways in overall transport (7% for passengers and 17% for freight) is cause for alarm, and specific measures must be undertaken in order to halt it, so as to reach a true picture of relative prices and conditions. In particular, the external costs of different modes of transport must be taken into consideration. For instance, the fees paid by lorries for road maintenance is about the same as for private cars in most countries, yet they cause much more damage to the roads they travel on than do private cars.
It is an encouraging sign that many European railway companies are at present undergoing extensive restructuring measures, both as regards their internal organisation and their relationship with the market and their national authorities. The objective is to enable them to respond more effectively and more rapidly to the needs of their client�le and rectify their financial situation.
However, it is not sufficient to introduce more efficient management techniques, to tackle the railways's indebtedness and to take account of external costs. All public railway undertakings lack adequate competition. If we politicians are concerned about the environment and therefore want more freight traffic off the roads; if we are concerned about passengers' right to choose among transport alternatives and want them not to overlook public transport; if we acknowledge the passengers' right to have an efficient and reasonably priced railway system; then privatisation is one part of the solution, if not necessarily the complete solution. What we need is more imagination as to the methods of privatisation. The transportation market is one of the few for which the majority of economists suggest some sort of government involvement to compensate for the shortcomings of market forces.
The role the railways are expected to play in the 21st century should be clearly defined. Is the development of the railways to be governed solely by considerations of microeconomic and financial profitability, or are the railways expected to do more than meet this sole requirement? In the latter case, solutions should be proposed for other problems, such as the railways' indebtedness, public service contracts, the requirements for more efficient management of railway undertakings, consideration of social implications and external costs.
In its Resolution 977 (1992) on European transport problems, the Assembly welcomed the opening in 1992 the Rhine-Main-Danube inland waterway, which would facilitate East-West trade and which, if enlarged, could connect Europe's remaining waterways. This measure could considerably relieve pressure on roads and rail.
The Rhine-Main-Danube waterway is a major event in European transportation history. A trans-European link of 3 500 kilometres linking Rotterdam to the Black Sea port of Ismail, traversing eleven countries. The Main-Danube link is 170 km long, comprising fifty-two locks and enormous artificial lakes. In addition, the Main and the Danube have had to be improved along 680 km between Frankfurt and Budapest. If the waterway is to serve its full purpose, however, it must be accompanied by improved road connections, particularly in the North-South direction, linking up with Mediterranean ports.
The Assembly has stressed that the development of river traffic in general must be assessed in the context of the currently strong demand for the use of roads. Europe would be well advised to make greater use of inland waterways, as a quieter, cheaper, less energy-consuming and less polluting alternative to other forms of traffic. This holds especially for goods which are bulky, or where speed of transportation is not the primary concern. However, as was pointed out during the Committee's deliberations, water transport can also have a negative environmental impact, such as spills of chemicals or oil, or the deformation of landscapes from the rerouting of inland waterways. All this, it was argued, calls for careful planning and prudent choices.
Finally, ECMT countries should give greater attention to short sea shipping. The new geographical-political map of Europe in fact cries out for further development of this sector, in particular in the Baltic Sea and the Mediterranean. For this reason, the Rapporteur welcomes the initiatives taken by the ECMT in this area at its previously mentioned meeting in Annecy. It should be noted that in terms of infrastructural requirements and energy and environmental performance, short sea shipping compares well with other modes of transport. It can contribute to the development of peripheral regions and of islands and has considerable growth potential. The efforts of the European Union to study the possibility of bringing short sea shipping on an equal footing with other modes of transport, by focusing primarily on the quality and efficiency of services and the port infrastructure and efficiency, should be seen as an opportunity for the preparation of short sea shipping for a wider Europe, and as a target also for the ECMT.
Given the many new members of the ECMT, and those to be expected in the future, short and medium distance maritime transport will be something the Organisation will have to concentrate on increasingly. The North Sea, the Baltic Sea, the Black Sea and the Mediterranean will in future be unavoidable elements of any ECMT overall European transport strategy. Land, inland water and maritime transport must be better integrated. The Rapporteur welcomes, therefore, that the ECMT has been given the mandate to study in greater detail the possibilities of substituting short sea shipping for land transport, as well as the investments necessary wherever these transport modes meet.
A Norwegian member of the Committee has taken up that country's idea for a "European Coastway". This is a project for what is mainly a sea transport system, possibly in combination with railway and/or road transport using harbours as effective logistics centres.
The "European Coastway" covers, as a starting point, all the actual coastal outlines, short-sea areas and inner waterways, where sea transport is capable of competing successfully with other modes of transport. Extensive use of information technology is a prerequisite for the development of the system. Norwegian studies show that sea transport along parts of Europe's long coastline can be fully competitive vis-�-vis land transport systems as regards regularity of service and price. In combination with transport on inland waterways and/or land transport, it can even compete on transport time. Moreover, it has low emissions of environmentally harmful gases such as carbon dioxide and nitrogen oxide in comparison with road transportation with corresponding quantities of goods. Your Rapporteur, coming himself from a nation which, like Norway, relies extensively on maritime and costal shipping, hopes that ECMT Ministers will encourage the Organisation to take up this subject even if it may mean a slight extension the ECMT's traditional mandate.
Within the European Union the share of inland waterway transport has steadily declined over the last twenty-five years, and overcapacity continues to plague the sector. Although not in the field of competence of ECMT but interesting to some of its member countries, an EU programme for the reorganisation of inland waterway transport was approved in 1989. It provided for each member state to establish a dismantling fund to reduce total carrying capacity (mainly financed by vessel owners but with some assistance from the EU). The programme foresaw restrictions on bringing new vessels onto the market. Its practical consequences have still to be evaluated, but the potential conflict of these restrictions with the objective of liberalising access to the EU's Single Market is evident.
The ECMT and the Council of Europe held a fourth joint Conference on "Road Safety Education for Young Children and Teenagers", in Strasbourg in March 1994. It naturally enough placed special emphasis on the situation in central and eastern Europe, which differs from that in western Europe. While in western Europe, with overall high car-ownership, road deaths among children and teenagers declined by 30 to 40 per cent between 1981 and 1992, central and east European countries experienced a similar percentage increase between 1986 and 1992.
The conference concluded that children and teenagers are very much at risk everywhere in Europe. This may partly be due to a shift in values over the past decade, in the direction of a greater "self-centredness". Teenagers are known to be greater risk-takers, and thereby either cause or fall victims to traffic accidents. Social and family values are being eroded, which reduce the ability of parents and peers to modify traffic behaviour. Moped, motorbike or vehicle ownership among them is increasing. In this situation we must do our utmost to devise new ways of protecting our young against the dangers of the road, through intensified education, and safer vehicles and roads.
One way is to have young people design road safety education themselves. But the conference also concluded that the mission of the school goes beyond the mere imparting of knowledge of traffic dangers as such. It must also help instill a sense of responsibility and training for citizenship. This implies, it said, that "road safety education must be integrated with a much broader programme of reflection on the major problems of society, e.g. the environment, the elimination of all forms of violence, behaviour in a community, public health".
"Traffic calming" in urban areas, apart from reducing accidents, can also restore to roads their original function of providing for personal interchanges. No longer seen as barriers, they can become user-friendly, especially for the more vulnerable groups of road users, such as those with reduced mobility. When the problems caused by road traffic are reduced, moreover, the quality of life is enhanced both directly and indirectly, at the same time as the environment is protected.
The ECMT Ministerial Council meeting held in Annecy in 1994 dealt extensively with the subject of road safety. One concern was how to reduce the number of accidents due to poor visibility in bad weather. Here, the ECMT suggests, for instance, reduced speed limits depending on visibility, forbidding certain types of vehicles to overtake and road-signs permitting more accurate judgment of distance.
The ECMT Ministers also drew attention to the need for greater coherence between the traffic infrastructure, road-signs and traffic rules. The replacement of intersections by roundabouts is one example. Finally, the ECMT recommends improved transport opportunities for people with reduced ability, for instance the handicapped and the elderly.
It is also important to harmonise working conditions in the transport sector in all ECMT countries in the interest of traffic safety, in particular as concerns lorry and bus transport. A joint ECMT-Council of Europe project similar to the one just mentioned should be envisaged, concentrating on the social aspects involved.
Road safety may improve over time, as roads improve and safer and better quality vehicles are introduced. Lower alcohol limits for drivers, stricter speed limits and the obligatory wearing of seat belts (also in the back seat) are successful examples of government action in many ECMT countries in recent times, heralding future action using advanced electronics to assist drivers and pedestrians. However, there can be no room for complacency, especially as the number of road users increases every year. Bringing down the number of dead and injured on our roads must always remain one of our top priorities, considering the human suffering involved, both on the part of the victims and of their families.
VII. Transport, the environment and the quality of life
Transport affects the environment and the quality of life in multiple ways, and, as already pointed out, the ECMT is resolutely tackling this issue. One problem is the external costs of transport. These are particularly felt in certain areas that are especially sensitive from an environmental point of view, such as the Alpine regions. The rapporteur commends the action taken by various Alpine countries to master this problem, and believes that this is an area where transport cost-efficiency must be subordinated to the need to respect the communities affected.
Another aspect concerns urban travel and sustainable development. Here, the ECMT has helped improve land use and traffic management, believing that one way to ameliorate the situation is through a package of reinforcing measures, including incentives to use public transport and, sometimes, the use of charges for congested roads.
Finally, there is the effect of transport on global warming. At its meeting in Annecy in May 1994, ECMT Ministers took note of measures taken in different countries to curb the growth of CO2 emission by transport, and the outlook until the year 2000. However, the Rapporteur remains prudent, or even pessimistic, in his predictions for the future in this area. We all remember the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. That "Earth Summit" adopted a framework convention on "climate change", which was signed by 150 countries including the ECMT countries.
The transport sector is estimated to contribute about a quarter of all human CO2 emissions believed to contribute to global warming. The major transport source of global warming is the CO2 output of road vehicles.
Better vehicle design and engine technology could further enhance fuel efficiency. Smaller vehicles and stricter speed limits could make additional contributions. Alternative fuels offer further potential. However, if at the same time the number of road vehicles increases, and goods transport is increasingly done by road rather than rail, then these efforts may well be offset. At global level, the rapid increase in wealth among many developing countries - of course welcome in itself - nevertheless makes it likely that the human contribution to global warming will accelerate. This does not relieve Europe from its duty to do what it can. Europe is, together with other industrialised parts of the world, still the major contributor to global warming and has been so for many decades. Therefore efforts must be pursued with the ECMT framework.
However, transport has other effects on the environment. In the Rapporteur's own city, Athens, major efforts have been made to preserve the Acropolis and other ancient sites from erosion due to car emissions. In Europe's countryside, sensitive landscapes are often aesthetically impaired by new roads. Now is the time to limit such damage. As has been stated before, the cost to the environment should be given as much attention as pure transport economics. This also holds for human health. The noise from streets or busy roads pervades our daily existence. We cough from exhaust fumes while our children's brains, closer to the exhausts themselves, absorb unknown quantities of lead and other noxious substances, with unknown long-term medical effects. Here, too, measures must be taken, such as the encouragement of new, more silent and cleaner cars, and the promotion of new types of energy sources for vehicles.
Whether the future lies in the widespread use of electric or hydrogen-powered vehicles, or by making drivers pay the full social and environmental costs of driving, any political solution is likely to build on several parallel approaches. Only an integrated policy, using a mixture of taxation, legislation, information, education and research and development has a chance of achieving substantial reductions in the energy used by transport. Ultimately, any approach is almost certain to involve changes in driving behaviour; smaller, lighter cars using alternative fuels; or changing travel habits in commuting, shopping, leisure and work.
VIII. Transport infrastructure
As has been pointed out at the outset of this report, the ECMT believes that, although transport policies have been demand-oriented policies over many years, there has been a serious fall-off in investment in infrastructure. Investments in Europe's road network, although considerable, have not been able to keep apace with the increasing road traffic. In central and eastern Europe, the road network was neglected in favour of railways under communism, and even the railways were not modernised during that time. Even though the current difficult economic climate has led to a certain slowing down of the increase in road traffic in our cities and countryside, predictions are for a steadily rising traffic volume into the next century. Many of our motorways are seriously congested, in as well as around numerous cities.
However, investment must not only follow demand; it is in the nature of things that demand will also adapt itself to the increased road capacity following from infrastructure investment. Therefore, as long as the road user pays less than the total social and environmental cost, his driving generates demand that will always be only one step behind capacity (or, sometimes, ahead of it). In Los Angeles, for instance, with its enormous system of highways, the average speed of vehicles is reported to be only about 15 km per hour!
The ECMT Ministers recognise the need for such things as road tolls, increased vehicle or petrol taxes. However, this logic has not gone uncontested in the Committee on Economic Affairs and Development. Some members feel that car users already pay more than their share, that is, more than they cost to society and the environment combined. Therefore, they argue, they should not be asked to pay additionally. Other members pointed to the need for an upgrading of public transport, including railways, if people are to be persuaded to leave their cars at home or at railways stations, and use public transport instead.
Finally, a few words are required about the ECMT's close cooperation with the European Union in order to create a trans-European transport network by the year 2010. The system includes roads, railways, combined transport, waterways and maritime transport, environment and safety aspects and telematics. The first Pan-European Conference was held in Prague in 1991, uniting Ministers responsible for transport from the whole of Europe at the initiative of the European Union. The second Pan-European Conference was held in Crete in 1994, with a considerable input by ECE/UN and ECMT. It led to the adoption of a proposal for a multimodal network of transport infrastructure within the European Union. In addition, a great number of priority projects are foreseen in the so-called "Second Delors package" (after the former President of the European Commission). The role of these projects if fundamental and is a decisive attempt of the European Union to complete its networks to serve not only its member states but transport in Europe as a whole.
The work carried out in the ECMT - published in the report "European transport trends and infrastructural needs" - was adopted at the ECMT Ministerial Council held in Noordwijk in May 1993. It was used as a basis for the work of the Crete Conference and serves as an example of the tangible cooperation existing between the ECMT and the EU. Considering the importance of a functioning, multimodal transport network for economic development, not least in central and eastern Europe, the Rapporteur hopes that the Assembly will give its firm political support to the project.
The relatively limited size of the European continent, and its sizeable population, might have led one to conclude that solving its transport problems would be comparatively easy. Yet solutions are rendered more difficult by the many nation states it contains. The latter have separate histories, traditions, interests and priorities.
The current overcoming of the divisions between Europe's different parts offers a unique opportunity to meet this challenge. Providing the new Europe with adequate transportation would promote trade and economic growth inherent in having some 600 million people so geographically close to each other. Especially the countries of central and eastern Europe, but also those on its northern and southern periphery, need the support and solidarity from the central European countries in order to achieve this. The best help is of course trade and investment. However, these require a functioning, efficient transport system.
The Rapporteur believes in the general virtues of a market-oriented economy. However, a European transport infrastructure must essentially be organised by governments and parliaments, with countries working in unison. The population of Council of Europe and ECMT member states, as well as the companies in this region, expect us to carry out the necessary far-sighted investments, and to play a leading role in giving transport a human and environmentally friendly character. Transport planning must anticipate market needs and channel the energies that lead to increased wealth for all. Governments and parliaments and international organisations such as the ECMT and the Council of Europe must take the lead in shaping the Europe of transport of tomorrow. This is the spirit in which the present report is submitted to the Assembly.
Reporting committee: Committee on Economic Affairs and Development
Budget implications for the Assembly: none.
Reference to committee: Doc. 7211 and Reference No. 1991 of 30 January 1995. Doc. 7452 and Reference No. 2053 of 22 January 1996.
Draft resolution unanimously adopted by the committee on 26 February 1996.
Members of the committee: Mr Davis (Chairman), MM. Pavlidis, Mrs Degn (Vice-Chairmen), Andreoli, B�rsony, Behrendt, Benetatos, Bilinski, Billing, Mrs Blattmann, MM. Bloetzer, Bog�r, Mrs Burbien�, MM. Buzatu, Caballero, Mrs Calner, MM. Caputo, Cerqueda Gispert, Coviello, MM. Dokle, Mrs Durrieu, MM. Elo, Eyskens, Fenech, Dame Peggy Fenner, MM. Figel, Frey, Goop, Grimsson, Gusenbauer, Kirilov, Kirsteins, Kol�r, Latronico, Le Grand, Leers, Liapis (Alternate: Pavlidis), Malinowski, Mautner-Markhof (Alternate: Schwimmer), Merkushov (Alternate: Gamanyuk), Minkov, Muravschi, Nov�k (Alternate: Kouck�), Pahor, Poppe, Puche, Radulescu Botica, Rippinger, Schmitz, Telgmaa, Townend (Alternate: Lord Kirkhill), Tripunovski, Valleix, Van der Maelen, Mrs Verspaget (Alternate: Blaauw), MM. Wallace (Alternate: Walsh), Yaroshynsky.
N.B. The names of those members present at the meeting are printed in italics.
Secretaries to the committee: MM. Torbi�rn and Bertozzi.
[1]by the Committee on Economic Affairs and Development
[2] ECMT member countries are (as of March 1996): Austria, Belgium, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Moldova, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, the Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and the United Kingdom. Six countries are Associate Members: Australia, Canada, Japan, New Zealand, the Russian Federation and the United States. Albania, Armenia, Belarus, Georgia and Morocco are also represented with observer status.