Importance of public transport

Transcription

1 1 EUROPEAN UNION POLITICAL GROUPS STATEMENTS* ON PUBLIC TRANSPORT IN LIGHT OF THE 2014 EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT ELECTIONS *Please note that some of the contributions have been slightly shortened. Full versions are available by sending an to Group of the European People's Party (EPP) Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats (S&D) Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE) Greens-European Free Alliance (Greens/EFA) European Conservatives and Reformists Group (ECR) European United Left/Nordic Green Left (GUE/NGL) Importance of public transport What is the importance of public transport for European citizens, the environment and the economy? To which EU policy areas can public transport contribute? As EU population is growing older and older, but in the same time the mobility of migrant workers all across EU is rising, the tension on our public transportation, especially in respect with infrastructure, is increasing fast. A strong EU policy regarding the sustainable growth of public transportation should mainly focus on providing tough investments in our public transportation network not just in our cities and suburbs, but in rural communities too to ensure that it is safe, reliable, and accessible for everybody. In many EU countries, especially in Eastern Europe, we have a very old system, some of which has operated far beyond its useful life. We could identify [ ] many projects [ ], but Both environment and economy are important to maintain a well-functioning and sustainable public transport system. Public transport can actively contribute to reduce emissions [ ]. We want less cars and more collective transport, such as metros, trams and busses, especially in urban areas. Public transport should be made more attractive, quality of services for passengers is very important. We need to make efforts to introduce innovative technological solutions for cleaner and more sustainable urban Public transport is an important element for the quality of life and mobility of European citizens and employees. It also helps reducing CO2 emissions if people don't need to take their cars to be mobile. But not only citizens, also retailers and companies benefit from a wellfunctioning public transport system. Public transport is indispensable for guaranteeing clean, safe and affordable mobility for all EU citizens. In combination with walking, cycling and car-pooling/carsharing, public transport allows Europeans to compose their own intermodal "mobility menu". At the same time, it can preserve and create jobs. Electric mobility is already more advanced and affordable in public transport (rail, tramways, buses) compared to electric individual transport. Obviously, public transport plays an important role in a number of policies such as environment policy including transition to a more eco-efficient transport system to cope with environmental challenges, energy policy, and it also plays an important social and economic role when it comes to fostering growth, jobs and innovations. The transport sector in general, including public transport, is essential for the economy as it provides movement of people and goods. However, most of Improving public transport opportunity is one of the key factors for sustainable growth within the EU. Innovative policies increasing the use of low carbon public transport modes will contribute to achieving the CO2 emission reduction targets consistent with the engagements undertaken in the UN Fighting Climate Change Conference by the EU and the concerned Member States. That means improving transport by rail, easing intermodal connections in urban areas among trams, light rail trains and local regional rail

2 cannot proceed with the work without adequate funding. Public transportation supports millions of jobs across the EU. The transport industry is an economic engine that keeps people at work, the internal market effective and the manufacturing energetic. Both highway/road congestion and air quality [ ] are at risk of getting worse if strategic planning and the big picture are not kept well into account. [ ] Managed properly, strategic planning and strategic investment are interconnected and a very wise use of public money, as they reduce the need for expensive roads and motorways, increase mobility, promote economic growth and commerce and improve air quality and quality of life [ ]. It is absolutely clear that public transportation is essential for most of, if not all the EU policies (from broad economy and finance to healthcare, education and culture). transport. One of the main objectives for the coming years should be the creation of a real market for clean, quiet and safe vehicles in combination with the introduction of more intelligent transport systems. [ ] Existing efforts to stimulate research and development in this field should be continued and reinforced. A new generation of busses, equipped with energy from renewable sources, can be an important boost for the manufacturers. On the other hand, public transport is a labour intensive sector. There should be more attention for the creation of qualitative jobs for skilled workers. This can be a boost to local economy as well. Thus, it offers great potential for the use of renewable energy and for climate protection. The electrification of public transport should therefore be a priority, rather than focussing only on the promotion of electric individual cars. Public transport can contribute to several EU policy areas: transport, tourism, but also sustainable economic development (reducing and minimising external costs), research, energy, climate, environment, health and social cohesion (affordable mobility for all). issues related to sustainable urban mobility, public transport and its infrastructure planning, first of all should be implemented by national, regional and local authorities, as they are responsible and capable of harnessing policy tools and translating general goals and strategies, including those of the EU level, into their own territorial specificities and needs. ECR group emphasizes that it is important that appropriate measures are prepared and implemented locally, instead of uniform EU solutions based on the "one size fits all" approach [ ]. National, regional authorities and local communities should have the freedom to implement policies and schemes that are best suited to their needs. network. Airports should be linked to urban areas by rail discouraging the use of private cars for tourism, and freight transport harbour areas should be linked to national and international rail network. Customer services by means of integrated ticketing and adequate facilities for disabled people should be promoted not only as a matter of citizens' rights but also as a job opportunity therefore improving sustainable regional economic development.

3 Group of the European People's Party (EPP) Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats (S&D) Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE) Greens-European Free Alliance (Greens/EFA) European Conservatives and Reformists Group (ECR) European United Left/Nordic Green Left (GUE/NGL) Transport in cities What is your vision for future transport in cities and what will you do to make it a reality? As the public transportation is essential for the entire socio-economic EU life, therefore the Strategic and forward planning suggested and overviewed by the Commission and implemented by Member States and local authorities, with a well-designed exchange of good practices, but focused especially on differences between regions and Member States, is essential for the sustainable growth and sustainable jobs for the benefit of all EU citizens and for Europe as a whole. [ ] A strategic and forward investment and design planning will provide the commitment to a better quality of life and job growth. Shortterm funding undermines the ability To reach the goal of a better urban mobility each city should draw up a long-term multimodal Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan. These plans need to take into account the mobility needs of the elderly, the disabled and socially vulnerable. Access to mobility for all should be one of the basic principles to be considered. In addition, a strategy for the distribution of goods and services in cities should be included in the plan. Smart planning of urban logistics is one of the key factors that would make such plans works. Keep big trucks out of the city centres and create a smart logistical chain for the delivery of ALDE would like to see passenger numbers in public transport increasing. However because of subsidiarity it is often difficult for the EU to regulate on public transport issues. Therefor we support soft law initiatives from the European Commission, such as the Urban Mobility Package. But the EU should also use its leverage of EU cofinancing via regional and structural funds to foster public transport. Cities suffer most from the current failures of transport policy, e.g. from air pollution, noise, accidents and unbalanced space use. However, with their dense structures, cities hold the greatest potential for shifting mobility towards more sustainable patterns. 50% of all journeys in European cities are shorter than 5 km - these are ideal distances for combining walking and cycling with public transport. Future transport in cities should be based on better space use, quality of life and health for all. It should contribute to more efficiency in urban mobility, without congestion and with increased safety (vision zero). Future Urban population growth will continue in the future and that would pose two main challenges: the need for more environmentally friendly transport and need for more efficient mobility in cities [ ]. Therefore future transport systems in cities should be wellconnected, smart and sustainable [ ]. This would require better, integrated infrastructure, and also modern and smart ticketing technologies. In addition, people's behaviour change will be very important as current mobility patterns will have to be changed. ECR group considers that this vision can become a reality if the Acknowledging that the European Parliament has only the right of suggesting initiatives to the European Commission and as we stress the need in developing a human dimension model for cities we consider improving measures to fully comply with existing innovative EU legislation and Member States or local authority best practice. We blamed the lack of ambition of the last agreement in revising the allowed CO2 emissions both for cars and utility light vans. The EU automotive industry was and is in condition to do more increasing research and better solutions to ensure citizens mobility. While the new public procurement and

4 of the EU, the Member States and the local authorities to move forward with sizeable and meaningful projects destined to improve the life of the communities. National and local authorities will only commit to major transportation projects if there is a commitment to long term funds due to the time and cost involved in deploying such projects. [ ] While fixing the old structures seems critical, the EU economy will fall behind if we do not invest in projecting, designing and investing in major transportation assets, thus building the future. We would suggest a cross-policy White Paper focused on public transportation and its major interconnections with, as shown, all the sectors of the life of our communities. goods in your city. Compatible datacollection and benchmarking of urban mobility systems are essential to allow authorities all over Europe to compare private car use, public transport use, walking, cycling, urban planning, energy efficiency and other environmental, social and economic parameters to develop their policies. The exchange of best practices is valuable and should be a widespread practice. transport should be barrier-free accessible, to the advantage of all users. authorities of all decision-making levels act taking into account the needs and specificities of urban, peri-urban and interurban areas. To a certain degree urban transport forms an integral part of the EU transport system since the whole transport system often begins and ends in large urban areas, and crosses plenty of them along the way. Therefore, at the EU level, one shall ensure that sufficient respective financial resources, aimed to R&I, as well as financing under the EU Structural Funds are dedicated to the projects of sustainable urban mobility. concession directives have been recently adopted by the European Parliament and the Council, no confrontation has yet started on PSO concerning transport by rail. As GUE NGL, our shadow Rapporteur will face the second reading safeguarding the positive deployment of 'in house' development of local transport public service contracts with the aim of keeping the right of public authorities to provide effective and affordable public transport to all the concerned citizens.

5 Group of the European People's Party (EPP) Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats (S&D) Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE) Greens-European Free Alliance (Greens/EFA) European Conservatives and Reformists Group (ECR) European United Left/Nordic Green Left (GUE/NGL) Role of the local authorities In urban public transport, it is currently the role of the local or regional authority to define the public service obligations for its territory and, without prejudice to EU and national law, decide how a contract is awarded. Do you support the current distribution of competences? A Strategic and forward planning, although proposed and overviewed by the Commission, will empower regional and local communities to make transportation investments that support their vital role in EU s economy and quality of life. The Commission, in deep cooperation with the Member States, has all the potential, the ways and the means to design such a plan, as it sees the big picture of Europe s future. In this respect, we [ ] need a powerful Commission, ready and able to actually not only design such a plan, but strive to implement it and put real pressure on the Member States and local authorities to follow the lead. The current distribution of Yes, we support this approach. Local and regional authorities should be the main actors in developing a long term sustainable Urban Mobility Plan. It's their responsibility to define public service obligations and decide how a contract is awarded. They know best what the needs of the citizens are and how the objectives can be reached. However, a better knowledge about other experience and an exchange of best practices on urban mobility can help local authorities to take the right decision. ALDE supports the proposals of the Commission to revise regulation 1370/2007. We would like to see the possibility of direct awarding restricted and more competitive tendering. Local and regional authorities should remain the responsible authorities for defining public service needs and obligations, in line with the principle of subsidiarity. The European level should concentrate on defining a clear legal framework and ensure fair competition. EU co-financing of urban projects could be linked to Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans (SUMPs), that would be set up by local authorities and translate into practice the EU's targets on CO2- emisions, road accident reduction and EU environmental legislation. In overall - yes, the ECR group supports the current system, as under this system and according to existing EU regulation, local or regional competent authorities may decide about the public service obligations for its territory and the contract awards [ ]. This system allows competent authorities in Member States to deal in the best way with the particularities of the certain urban area and to determine the level of competition within a given area, and streamline the supply of public transport. And at the same time selection of service providers must respect the principles of openness, transparency and Yes, we support all share of competences where the citizens and the local communities could effectively choose the best solution to ensure sustainable mobility, and local administrations could be monitored in achieving this goal. GUE NGL stress that it's a competence of the concerned local authority to deliver its own transport plan and to decide how to award a public transport service contract. They directly respond to the citizens to the economic and environmental development of their region and could not be bound by abstract competition EU rules. The quality of the transport services to be provided is strictly linked to the needs

6 competencies is acceptable, as long as it is meaningfully monitored. It is natural that local authorities know better about their present and short/medium term needs, but they do not have the actual possibilities to see big, thus to plan big. [ ] Many EU regions and metropolitan areas [ ] are burdened with very old bus, tram and underground systems, at over-capacity as well as with aging roads and bridges that undermine their ability to actually meet the EU s future economic output. Given these factors, EU regions and metropolitan areas should be at the centre of the EU public transportation infrastructure investment. They are the actual drivers of the 21 st century EU economy. As you may very well see, the truth is always somewhere in the middle. non-discrimination (even when public procurement procedures may not apply) which are set by the EU regulation. and the requests for mobility by citizens and economic stakeholders. As GUE NGL we strongly criticized the undue interference [ ] by the European Commission. Member States should be engaged in setting common guidelines regarding reciprocity and open access to transport services in order to gain a homogeneous result in awarding public transport service contracts not driven by single private benefit aims. Moreover GUE NGL support that no deadline in giving direct award contracts should be foreseen at all: it's up to the award authority to decide, monitor and guarantee quality of such contracts.

7 Group of the European People's Party (EPP) Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats (S&D) Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE) Greens-European Free Alliance (Greens/EFA) European Conservatives and Reformists Group (ECR) European United Left/Nordic Green Left (GUE/NGL) Liberalisation of the railway market What is your approach to the liberalisation of the domestic railway markets in Europe? In the EU, national railways deeply connected to national governments have always been the norm. EU governments tend to be much more active in national planning than in an EU-focused strategic planning [ ]. The EU-focused approach should have the greatest level of influence. It is true that there is a fragmented customer base in different countries, language/cultural differences, different transport and labour regulations, the use of VAT and customs revenues, and historically different payment and financing schemes. A stronger single market, consisting of only one level of strategic planning and overview, [ ] should offer much complexity and especially efficiency than what one would expect for a 28-nation different and often contradictory design. [ ] The economic success of the EU over the past six Liberalisation should not be a goal in itself but should be seen as a useful tool to create a more competitive sector with high quality services. Market opening needs to be accompanied by stringent rules on passenger's rights as regards travel information and ticketing and strengthened social rules for railway workers. We need to find the right balance between market opening and the protection of public service obligations (PSO) for each Member State. "Cherry picking" of commercially attractive lines should be avoided. Member States have different experiences with the process of market opening, and ALDE has always supported the liberalisation of domestic railway markets in Europe because we believe in the positive impact of market opening for quality of service and prices. Local authorities and passengers would benefit from competition in this sector. This has been demonstrated in Member states which opened their domestic markets. If liberalisation plays a positive role in fair competition in favour of improving the quality of services, it can be supported. Nevertheless, it should not be a liberalistic dogma; public services need to remain a matter of public decision making. Liberalisation must not lead to a further oligopolization on markets. A proper regulatory framework on intermodal fair competition (namely through the internalisation of external costs) as well as a boost in financing of public transport (see rail infrastructure, noise reduction at the source, European Rail Traffic Management System) are our green In overall, the ECR group has welcomed and supported the Fourth Railway Package with the aim to complete the internal market for rail services and create a true Single European Rail Area, as far as it is currently possible to overcome historical and technical disparities amongst different regions and parts of the EU. This completion includes also the liberalisation of the domestic railway markets in order to achieve better quality of services, including security and reliability, what is in the clear interests of passengers. And passengers should be given a real choice between several rail carriers and services, only then one can call the market more open GUE NGL believe that more public collective responsibility is needed to achieve in a consistent way the measures to immediately reduce the transport CO2 emissions and the effects of climate change, as the lack of appropriate mitigation policies will concern all the economic activities and the welfare of the whole community. Simply liberalising the domestic railway market will not improve the coherence of such policies as the only proposed drivers chosen by the private stakeholders will be reducing services and labour costs, increasing private benefits by means of public investments. On the contrary the

8 decades can certainly be attributed to opening and liberalizing the market. Making the internal European railway market more transparent and more predictable will lead to more transport demand, thus sustainable growth and sustainable jobs. Therefore, by all means, we fully support the coherent implementation of the 4 th Railway Package. Although the European Parliament endorsed the introduction of a right for EU railway undertakings to offer commercial domestic passenger services in all Member States as from 2019, competitive tendering procedures for public service contracts have been postponed to 2023 and are subject to very significant exceptions. Amendments adopted by the EP also fail to ensure an effective independence of the infrastructure manager and financial transparency within vertically integrated structures which are essential to ensure an equal and nondiscriminatory access to the network. We truly hope for a better legislation coming out of the second reading negotiations. therefore should be given enough flexibility to organise their network in such a way that an optimal mix of open access services and services performed under Public Service Contract can be achieved in order to ensure a high quality of services for all passengers. Member States should be able to choose between more options to find the right balance between open access and PSO. policy priorities. and competitive. As regards mandatory competitive award of public service rail contracts, the ability of Member States to define public service obligations will be preserved. The ECR group considers that the transition periods for tendering procedures for public service contracts in rail should not be extended beyond the lengths proposed by the European Commission and similarly, possibilities for direct awards of rail contracts should not be extended further than proposed by the Commission. challenge is how to gain by robust public investment safer and more reliable transport by rail. Common harmonized rules are required regarding interoperability, safe operation and deployment of shared technical specifications on ERTMS on which as GUE NGL we addressed clear concerns to the European Commission and the rail industry by a written question. We need more common public transport market and less free competition among operators that will multiply costs for the system and for the customers.