RESOLUTION A3-0120/92

Resolution on transport in the Mediterranean area

The European Parliament,

-having regard to the motion for a resolution by Mr Kostopoulos on the development and modernization of Greece's railway network (B3-0667/91),

-having regard to the motion for a resolution by Mr Amaral on the common transport policy and the countries of the Mediterranean and Southern Europe (B3-0683/91),

-having regard to the motion for a resolution by Mr Stamoulis on the improvement of the transport infrastructure between Greece and the European Community (B3-1269/91),

-having regard to the report of the Committee on Transport and Tourism (A3-0120/92),

A.whereas there is an urgent need for the Community to define a new policy for the Mediterranean, which should be more comprehensive, more forward-looking and ambitious in its goals and more generous in practical terms,

B.whereas this new policy must be wide-ranging in its scope and must embrace the adjoining regions and seas, for reasons of communication, environmental protection and safety and also on socio-political grounds,

C.whereas it is vital to overcome the centre/periphery distinction at Community level, as well as the underlying causes of that distinction, and whereas a suitable and imaginative transport policy can make a major contribution to that end; whereas a coherent policy for the whole Mediterranean region is therefore essential,

D.having regard to the need to promote transport in Southern Europe and the Mediterranean region by constructing new routes, linking up existing routes, connecting nodal points, opening up isolated regions and improving the quality, efficiency and safety of transport whilst either preserving or rehabilitating the environment, especially in view of the great natural beauty and extreme ecological vulnerability of the Mediterranean region,

1.Welcomes the decision reached in Maastricht to include in the Treaty a title concerning trans-European networks, thus recognizing the Community's competence in respect of the creation and development of such networks in the sectors of transport infrastructure, telecommunications and energy, and calls for the new Mediterranean policy, which it is vital that the Community should define as a matter of urgency, to include a transport component and to cover the above sectors;

2.Welcomes, moreover, in the context of Maastricht, the decisions enshrining economic and social cohesion as one of the fundamental objectives of the Union, in parallel with the definition of the frontier-free area, thus furthering the interests of southern Europe and the Mediterranean regions, supports the project for the cohesion fund, to be instituted by the end of 1993, which will be applicable to the funding of specific projects, the transport sector included;

3.Decides, in view of the heightened profile of the transport component in the new Mediterranean policy, and in line with the recent Prague conference on a pan-European transport policy, to organize, in cooperation with the Commission and with contributions from the Council and other interested bodies, a Mediterranean transport conference in 1993, to be open to participation by all the Member States and all the Mediterranean countries, as well as the countries with Black Sea coastlines;

4.Considers that the new Mediterranean policy must cover not only the Mediterranean sea itself and the adjacent seas and maritime areas, but also the entire Mediterranean coastline and, therefore, all the countries concerned whether or not they are Community Member States, and also the island states and the other Mediterranean islands, including those falling within the territory of the Southern European Member States; and welcomes the provisions in the new Title 12 of the Treaty, introduced at Maastricht, concerning improved links between the island, isolated and peripheral regions and the Community heartland;

5.Considers that such a policy should also aim to resolve the problems of the Middle East, on the basis of the re-establishment of the communications affected by the Gulf War, in the context of a solution to the Israeli-Arab conflict, and of improved levels of communication and cooperation with all the Mediterranean seaboard countries, including those of the Eastern Mediterranean (i.e. Egypt, Israel, Lebanon, Syria and Turkey);

6.Stresses, accordingly, that a broader transport policy should not only aim at meeting the needs of the Community's most developed regions or ensuring communication between those regions and Central and Eastern Europe, but should also provide for the rational interpretation of the Mediterranean area into the pan-European design which is now in process of creation, thus guaranteeing the continuity and quality of communications within and from the Mediterranean area and on both sides of the Mediterranean itself;

7.Considers that the promotion of the Mediterranean region, on the basis of the above comprehensive definition, as well as action to correct the currently increasing imbalances with their potential for generating tensions, would be facilitated by modernized and more intensive transport, and also by a rational distribution of tourism, but points out that any increase in transport and tourism levels must absolutely respect the need to preserve or rehabilitate the environment, and the policies aimed at securing those objectives;

8.Notes that the development of transport in Southern Europe and the Mediterranean region requires: improved North-South communication within the Community and between the two sides of the Mediterranean; improved links between countries; joint planning with regard to the projected European networks, the development of transfrontier regions and the opening up of regions suffering from a greater or lesser degree of isolation; new means of dealing with natural barriers; and full implementation in practice of the agreements with the 'transit countries'; and is also aware of the need to involve all the countries with Mediterranean coastlines, be they Member States or not, and the island states, in the debate on transport in the Mediterranean region, with a view to achieving coordinated policies, protocols for development and modernization and the opening up to the market of areas still affected by protectionism;

9.Notes that not all Member States in the Mediterranean region are making optimal use of existing facilities for simplifying customs procedures and reducing delays at frontiers; calls therefore on the Member States to take decisive action to remove bottlenecks at borders;

10.Notes that the process, vital as it is, of promoting infrastructure projects, new constructions and the opening of new routes, has failed to be backed up by adequate, or indeed by any, conclusive environmental impact assessment; reiterates, therefore, its demand that the Commission should cease to subsidize or guarantee any construction projects which do not fully satisfy the relevant criteria, and that it should, rather, actively oppose such projects;

11.Calls for new infrastructure projects in the Pyrenees and the Alps to be examined very carefully, not only in respect of environmental compatibility but also to ensure that even in the long term the volume of traffic they generate will not jeopardize the ecobalance in these sensitive mountain regions;

12.Notes the increasing number of petitions to Parliament calling for action against the pollution of the Mediterranean by oil slicks, dumping, bilge-washing and degassing, in contravention of the relevant conventions and programmes; and, while recognizing that it is not possible arbitrarily to set up large numbers of new treatment and purification plants, believes that the Commission should promote a modern and forward-looking study with a view to determining the correct distribution of an adequate number of such plants across the Mediterranean, in line with traffic levels; calls on the relevant planning authorities to give serious consideration to the arguments of the specialist environmental organizations and, where possible, to take account of their wishes;

13.Expresses its concern at the shipping accidents, and in particular those off Genoa and Livorno in April 1991, and calls on the Commission to determine a Community safety policy for navigation and maritime transport, to include adequate professional training for crew members, with upward harmonization of professional standards, and investment in new technologies and infrastructures aimed at preventing such accidents, giving particular consideration to shipbuilding, safety measures at sea and on land and revision of international rules and standards;

14.Welcomes, in this context, the proposed creation of a European transport safety council, while pointing out that the proposed council, which would be primarily concerned with road safety, must take account not only of the dangers posed by obsolete infrastructures, but also of those arising from the construction or modernization of roads in the wake of inadequate planning or irresponsible speculation; calls for the proposed council to be allotted responsibility, in addition, for the other modes of transport, including maritime transport, since the Mediterranean, and, inter alia, the Adriatic, the Gulf of Genoa and the Lagoon of Venice continue to be high-risk waters in respect of both navigation accidents as such and ecological disasters, while many waters, and in particular the Dardanelles/Istanbul area, suffer from frequent transport of inflammable and explosive materials; and insists that the causes of these recurrent major accidents (of which there is on average at least one a year), which frequently i

nvolve flags of convenience, be investigated, clearly stated and vigorously combated;

15.Stresses the need for a land-based radio support system for vessels, in order to improve safety levels for navigation and to protect the marine environment (until such time as satellite systems, which offer a far higher degree of accuracy, are operational for civilian users , or, alternatively, in parallel with such systems in the near future, in accordance with the views of the International Association of Lighthouse Authorities, welcomes accordingly, the Commission's amended proposal (COM(91)0445)OJ No. C 53, 28.2.1992, p. 71, following the opinion of Parliament, favouring the extension to the Mediterranean (including the Gulf of Genoa and the Lagoon of Venice) and the adjoining western part of the Gulf of the existing radio support systems for vessels; and considers that there is a strong case for a Mediterranean convention on sea transport, to discuss the question of safety in the seas concerned on the basis of detailed examination of its various aspects and related matters;

16.Welcomes the recent accessions of Italy, Switzerland and Spain to Eurocontrol; points out, however, that the correct management of Community airspace - taking account of security imperatives and the requirements of efficiency, economy and air traffic flow - necessitates the harmonization and integration of the different control methods, with a view to the definition of a unified system, and that such a system must also include, beyond the area referred to, the remaining European and Mediterranean countries whose airspace borders on that of the Community; and calls on Eurocontrol to admit all the non-European countries with Mediterranean coastlines on the basis of observer status;

17.Calls on the Commission to submit to the Council and Parliament a proposal for a negotiating brief for the opening of talks with all the non-European Mediterranean countries with a view to the conclusion of an air traffic agreement;

18.Welcomes the amendment introduced in Maastricht to Article 75(1) of the Treaty of Rome, as well as the new subparagraph (c) inserted into the same article, to the effect that, in accordance with Parliament's repeated requests, measures will be adopted to improve transport safety, and notes that the argument invoked on occasion by some Member States that there is no Community competence in this field is thus no longer valid;

19.Calls on the Commission, in the context of its commitment to liberalization and harmonization, to take account of the unjustifiable deficiencies which still render transfrontier communication difficult and tend to keep certain 'less developed enclaves' in a state of isolation; and to encourage examination of the problems of insufficient coordination or synchronization - whether long-standing or arising from modernization - on a country-by-country basis, and to determine means of tackling them (an example would be the existence of different categories of road on the same link - e.g. motorways and ordinary roads - by reason of which motorists tend systematically to opt for certain routes in preference to others, to the detriment of the regions affected, on grounds which are alien, if not contrary, to their reasons for travelling);

20.Points out that, in the rail sector, substantial delays are affecting finalization of the plans for conversion to the standard European gauge and the associated decisions, in some of the Member States where this measure is necessary; reiterates its view that such conversion is indispensable for the promotion of the rail sector on a harmonious basis; and calls on the Member States concerned and the Commission jointly to finance this extremely costly operation, since it cannot be realized without Community aid;

21.Notes that, in Portugal, the national north-south rail link - of which the proposed Lisbon-Oporto high-speed line would be part - cannot completely fulfil its potential without the construction of a rail bridge over the Tagus suitable for modern long-distance trains or without being linked, at an intermediate point, to the Spanish and European high-speed train network;

22.Notes that, of the Mediterranean Member States, Greece is the one which, in relative terms, requires the most attention and investment in the area of land transport, since it is in need of an alternative land-sea-land link (via Italy) with the rest of the Community via the Balkans, while not even the road link has, however, seen any significant improvements; and believes that it is also necessary to provide an alternative to the existing link between central Greece and the Peloponnese, which is currently served by the Isthmus of Corinth route or by the Patras ferry;

23.Considers that it is vital to modernize existing communications and to create new links within the south-south arc in order to overcome the peripheral situation of the Iberian peninsula and stimulate its development, to ensure the productive mutual interaction of the development poles located in Catalonia, the Provence-Alps-Côte d'Azur region and the Italian regions of Liguria, Lombardy and Piedmont, and to promote similar interaction between the Po basin and Slovenia, Istria and Croatia; and calls, similarly, for the creation on the southern Mediterranean coast of a road and rail infrastructure permitting unbroken longitudinal communication between the countries of the seaboard;

24.Considers that plans must be made to modernize railway links, including high-speed railways, between Barcelona, Marseille, Nice and Genoa in order to prevent road and motorway saturation and environmental damage and promote the tourist trade, in the light of the recent decisions taken by Italy in this field;

25.Draws the Commission's attention to the increasing problems affecting the traffic flow between Catalonia, the Provence-Alps-Côte d'Azur region and Italy (especially Lombardy and Piedmont) owing to the saturation of the A8 motorway - particularly acute between Orange and the border - and stresses that this problem can only be resolved by the construction of two new tunnels through the Alps, i.e. the TENDE tunnel (Alpes Maritimes) for Milan-Barcelona international traffic and the L'ECHELLE tunnel (Hautes Alpes) for Marseille-Turin traffic. Access roads should be commensurate with the expected volume of traffic (four-lane motorway or road for the Tende tunnel and basic 7-meter road for the L'Echelle tunnel);

26.Advocates the setting up of a Mediterranean Committee, in the context of the working party on Community ports, the holding of conferences of sectional interest (e.g. of the Adriatic ports) and the participation in the Committee or the sectional conferences of representatives of ports in non-member countries located on the Mediterranean or the adjoining seas, with a view to joint consideration, on the basis of direct interest, of the role of those ports, their problems (e.g. administration, modernization, conversion and communication) and those of the seas concerned (e.g. traffic and pollution).

27.Considers that a new and productive strategy could be to identify Mediterranean ports of Community interest and transform the best-situated and most modern ports of call into intermodal hubs, thus filling a vital need in respect of insertion into or interconnection with the European transport networks and adaptation to combined transport; draws the attention of the relevant authorities to the failure of their ports policy to keep up with the need for such a strategy or to introduce the necessary material and administrative modernization, and calls on them to take specific action in this field;

28.Considers that the main problems affecting ports in the Mediterranean and the adjoining seas are failure to modernize at a sufficient pace, administrative inertia, the need to reorganize ports on the basis of efficiency criteria, and the continued existence of small ports whose artificially maintained viability is continuing to decline; and believes that the Commission should contribute both to the conversion of such ports and, in general, to the modernization required, the introduction of new industries or technologies, and the provision of technical and financial aid aimed at ensuring job creation, vocational training and social conversion, possibly on the basis of a 'Report' programme, on similar lines to the Renaval and Rechar programmes;

29.Stresses that there is a vital and urgent need for harmonization measures in the transport sector, especially in the social field, in the absence of which the liberalization of any form of transport will have serious economic and social consequences for the weakest regions in the Community, especially in the Mediterranean;

30.Welcomes the development of such programmes as MEDITELPLUS, EDIFACT and ESCALE, aimed at improving administration and handling processes in the ports, as well as the extension of the telematic intercommunication networks between the ports of the Western Mediterranean, Southern Spain and Portugal and the Maghreb; and considers that the Commission should encourage, in the context of a Community programme for the specialization of ports and through the working party on ports, the extension, on an experimental basis, of these networks to other ports throughout the Mediterranean Basin (recalling that certain such ports, e.g. Haydarpasha, have begun preparations for taking part), the general standardization of communications (e.g. by means of the 1-EDIFACT model), and its standardized application to international networks;

31.Considers, moreover, that the new telematic networks based on certain southern cities, which have thus become telecommunications centres, are likely to benefit those cities substantially by linking them to the core centres of the system in the major cities and also, on a permanent basis, to the main productive areas and the various transport infrastructures, as in the current project in Naples involving the creation of a 'teleport';

32.Considers that the reduction in maintenance and loading and unloading charges at ports and shorter docking times would help to improve the attractiveness, as far as the Mediterranean is concerned, of maritime transport in cases where it could provide an alternative to overloaded road transport routes;

33.Believes that Mediterranean traffic can and should benefit from an increase in East-West trade and from trade and navigation agreements defined on an equitable and productive basis and aimed at improving communications between Community ports and such Eastern ports as Constanta (Romania) and Odessa (Ukraine), already approached in this connection by representatives of Western ports, or those of Sebastopol, Batum, Novorossisk and Sukumi, which are capable of playing a major, responsible and autonomous role following the introduction of a market economy in the former Soviet republics, as well as the current and welcome modernization and opening up to intermodal traffic of such ports as Mersin, Izmir, Haydarpasha and Trabzon;

34.Favours further agreements and intensified exchange, on an equitable basis, between the Community and the Maghreb countries, and believes that, to this end, it would be desirable for those countries to take steps to remove the existing obstacles, such as the deficient state of equipment of their ports, especially as regards containers, their protectionist legislation, the administrative complications, the non-convertibility of their currencies and the lack of sufficient bilateral conventions (a case in point being the arrangements for servicing Community lorries and trailers in those countries), given that such conventions could usefully be developed into framework agreements between the Maghreb countries and the Community;

35.Considers that the absence of full respect for the universal values which underlie the European project should not obviate agreements, cooperation and assistance in the transport field, since greater communications, trade and exchange are in fact likely to bring those of our partners whose present attitudes may be criticized on such grounds closer into line with those values and with our way of life;

36.Welcomes the forthcoming introduction of natural gas in Greece and Portugal, as well as the links being created between the various national gas distribution networks in the western Mediterranean countries (i.e. France, Spain, Portugal, the Maghreb countries, and Italy);

37.Welcomes the opening of the trans-Mediterranean gas pipeline between Italy and Tunisia, and the construction of a new gas pipeline between Spain and Morocco, strengthening the link between the Algerian production zones and the European industrial areas, since these developments will make it possible, by the end of the century, to achieve substantial diversification of transport modes and energy sources in the Community as a whole;

38.Notes the conclusions of the study 'Air Transport and Southern Regions of the Community', commissioned by the Commission from the Transport Studies Group of the Polytechnic of Central London - which could usefully be examined by the Committee on Transport and Tourism - arguing that a reduction in fares as from 1992 could, in the Mediterranean area, stimulate a major rise in traffic and the creation of large numbers of new lines, and calls on the Commission to submit proposals to this effect to Parliament and the Council;

39.Recognizes that air transport in Southern Europe and the Mediterranean area continues to suffer from high levels of protectionism, the relatively limited choice of links and services, the frequent disproportion between the excessive capacity of the aircraft and the characteristics of certain market areas and the excessive tendency to centre routes on the capitals of the Member States, and advocates the need to phase out the privileges of the dominant national companies, decentralize routes, encourage the creation of new lines and an increase in services with smaller aircraft (turboprops), and accept the temporary protection of new routes to or from regional airports and/or agreements on joint operations for such routes;

40.Welcomes the opening up of the market, especially in Portugal and France, to new companies or to companies other than the dominant national airline (for the moment on short-distance and/or interregional routes); deplores however, the fact that where the same route is served by more than one company competition is limited to the provision of services and does not extend to fare levels;

41.Welcomes the recent inauguration, following an initiative by the Portuguese company LAR of - among various planned links - an air link between Lisbon and Seville, while deploring the absence of any plans to introduce a direct and convenient rail service between Seville and any city in Portugal (given that none exists at present), in view of Seville's tremendous development prospects; notes, in this connection, the quite justified demands being made in the Algarve region for a modern link between Faro and Seville, which would be technically compatible with the European TGV network, which is planned to terminate in the Andalusian capital;

42.Calls for the airbase in Beja to be put to civilian use for commercial purposes, as a vital element in the combined transport system for the regions of the Alentejo and Andalusia in connection with the marketing and importing of goods; and, while welcoming the recent protocol between the Portuguese government and the employers' associations of the Alentejo region concerning proposals for such civilian use, calls on the Community to consider granting financial aid towards the investment which will be required to alter the function of this airport;

43.Calls for the creation of new Mediterranean maritime links in order to reduce pressure on the over-used road links on the same routes - as in the case of the Genoa-Barcelona route, where a sea link would reduce the congestion referred to above (see paragraph 25) on the A8 motorway;

44.Considers that the liberalization of cabotage will benefit links between the southern Member States and their island regions, and also between islands, as well as helping to alleviate road congestion - as, for instance, in Italy, where reliable sea links between the mainland and both Sicily (e.g. Genoa-Palermo and Naples-Palermo) and Sardinia (e.g. Livorno and Genoa-Olbia-Cagliari-Porto Torres) would relieve pressure on the roads which at present carry the main weight of lorry traffic between the places concerned;

45.Points out, however, that the liberalization of cabotage, especially in southern Europe and the Mediterranean, will also entail losses for companies and for certain national airlines in the Member States, as well as substantial costs (as applies to the new port strategy, and will apply to the abolition of customs barriers), and should therefore not be initiated before harmonization of the conditions prevailing in this field of maritime activity, subject, obviously, to consultation with the relevant administrations, shipping companies and trade unions;

46.Expresses the hope that the recent creation of the AACI (Airports Association Council International) - Europe will encourage the definition of an airport policy for Southern Europe and the Mediterranean area, since such a policy is urgently needed; and considers that it would be desirable, to this end, to extend Community competence to this sector, in order to ensure a sensible distribution of airports, the provision of all the necessary equipment for dealing with all situations and emergencies, the creation of new parallel airports where necessary to prevent the saturation of take-off and landing space, the possible extension, adaptation and modernization of airports with a view to developing north-south and south-south links on the basis of free competition and via the use of conveniently sited 'hubs', such as the GAP-SISTERON hub in the Southern Alps, the replacement of those airports whose characteristics require specialist assistance on landing or the overflying of urban catchment areas at dangerousl

y low heights, and action to combat noise pollution where it has reached damaging levels in the vicinity of certain airports;

47.Welcomes the modernization and extension of airports such as Montpellier/Frejorgues and Marseilles, and of others outside the Community such as Antalaya, while pointing out that in many cases (such as that of Lisbon) modernization and/or extension by themselves will not bring airports into line with the full range of modern requirements, the latest communication strategies or the expected increases in traffic; and considers that, in view of this, there is a strong case for building new airports for such cities as Lisbon (where a new airport has been planned for more than ten years), Naples (the Lago Patria international airport) or Athens, and for declaring these schemes to be projects of Community interest;

48.Welcomes the action taken and planned by the Commission in support of transport by inland waterways; expresses its surprise, nonetheless, at the failure of this support to be translated, in most cases, into studies or decisions leading to concrete action; and notes the absence, as things now stand, of any action on the integrated plan for the Arade river (Algarve, Portugal), of a study on extending the navigability of the Tagus (Portugal/Spain), of any work on the Milan-Adriatic waterway link or of a start on construction of a canal link between the Adriatic and the Danube basin;

49.Expresses its particular surprise at the failure to complete the north-south waterway link, which is dependent on the Rhone-Rhine connection, especially in view of the current creation of new links between East and West and the conclusion of the Rhine-Main-Danube connection; and considers that the above Rhone-Rhine international link would be of major Community interest, in accordance with the stated desire to increase waterway traffic levels;

50.Calls, given the likely substantial growth of water traffic with Central and Eastern Europe and the possible use of the Danube by the countries bordering on the Black Sea, for the updating and standardization, as a matter of urgency, of the existing bilateral agreements with third countries, and for these agreements to be complemented by Community rules governing access to navigation within the Community for countries wishing to gain entry to its market, so as to guarantee, in general and within the framework of a single system, Community preference as regards intra-Community transport and cabotage, in accordance with the terms of the resolution on the opening of negotiations between the Community and third countries on rules applicable to the carriage of freight and passengers by inland waterways between the parties concerned, adopted by Parliament on 13 March 1992Minutes of that date, Part II, Item 5;

51.Welcomes the building of the second bridge across the Bosphorus - as advocated by Parliament in its resolution of 12 October 1988 on priorities for the common transport policy in connection with the development of the Mediterranean regionOJ No. C 290, 14.11.1988, p. 42 - which was inaugurated at the end of 1988; also welcomes the conclusion of the viability studies and preliminary work for the Bosphorus tunnel, which is planned with a view to facilitating the rail link between Europe and Asia; and recalls the other projects for fixed links which were also embodied in motions for resolutions and are extremely important for various transport routes in the Mediterranean region but have not yet been undertaken, viz.: the links between the Italian peninsula and Sicily at the Strait of Messina, between Central Greece and the Peloponnese (Rion-Andirio) and between Europe and the Maghreb at the Strait of Gibraltar;

52.Calls on the Community authorities to submit, as rapidly as possible, proposals for the setting up of the cohesion fund referred to in paragraph 2 above, together with proposals for the construction of the major trans-European networks, especially in the transport sector;

53.Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Commission and Council.