Activities of Jakop G. DALUNDE related to 2022/2021(INI)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION Large transport infrastructure projects in the EU – implementation of projects and monitoring and control of EU funds
Amendments (26)
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes Directive (EU) 2021/1187 on streamlining measures for advancing the realisation of the trans- European transport network (TEN-T)1 and urges the Member States to implement it more effectively; , particularly regarding cross-border sections in order to prevent that they systematically become bottlenecks and delay the overall completion of the European Transport Corridors and the TEN-T network; _________________ 1 OJ L 258, 20.7.2021, p. 1.
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Considers that the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) should act as an effective financial incentive to bridge the gap between national interests and European added value, contributing to align priority levels and timelines particularly of cross-border projects or segments, while ensuring at the same time a fair distribution of funding;
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. AStresses that in order to ensure completion of the TEN-T network in due time it is essential that the level of funding, including Union funding, matches the ambition and the aggregated financial needs of the infrastructure projects, asks that CEF funding for transport priorities be enhanced and ring- fenced;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Emphasises that it is of utmost importance that EU funded large transport infrastructure projects are fully in line with, and contribute to, the objectives set in the Sustainable and Smart Mobility Strategy, particularly as it regards a modal shift towards rail and sustainable transport modes;
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4 b. Points out that different transport modes and their associated infrastructures have negative externalities such as greenhouse gas emissions, biodiversity loss and air pollution, among others, which are still not internalised in terms of transport costs;
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4 c. Recalls that according to the European Court of Auditors, congestion in the EU costs 270 billion euro yearly, and may reduce productivity by 30 percent, points out that new or capacity enhanced roads generate induced demand, which does not allow effective combating of congestion and interferes with EU climate and modal shift goals, considers therefore that clear indicators and targets concerning emissions, air quality, congestion and improved transport efficiency need to be further developed and part of the approval criteria for funding;
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Recognises the need for greater investment in timely pre-feasibility studies and feasibility studies, scoping, detailed design, strategic environmental and climate assessment, and public consultation in the early project stages to avoid costly delays at the later planning and construction phases;
Amendment 46 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5 b. Calls for Union funding for large transport infrastructure projects to be granted only when the project in question contributes with significant European added value in terms of the TEN-T network as a whole, such as projects removing major bottlenecks, and considers that EU funding should prioritise such projects where national public and private investment incentive is insufficient to ensure timely completion of the projects;
Amendment 49 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Recognises the need for streamlined regulatory processes to ensure appropriate public consultation while ensuring that critical infrastructure projects are not unduly blocked, stresses that while accelerated procedures could be envisaged for priority projects in terms of European added value, a thorough Environmental Impact Assessment is mandatory;
Amendment 52 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Underlines that large transport infrastructure projects shall adhere to the “Do No Significant Harm” principle and be in line with the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030, as well as be in line with and contribute to the EU zero pollution vision for 2050 and corresponding 2030 targets, emphasises the importance of ensuring that the selection of projects under EU funding is fully in line with the European Green Deal, the EU Climate Law and the EU climate targets for 2030 and 2050;
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6 b. Stresses the importance of performing for every large infrastructure transport project a thorough Social and Environmental Cost-Benefit Analysis, including a climate impact analysis, in order to obtain an accurate estimation for the return on investment and particularly the life-cycle emissions savings, with 2050 as a milestone;
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)
Paragraph 6 c (new)
6 c. Considers important the establishment of a prioritisation on the basis of environmental and climate performance criteria, beyond the socio- economic dimension, according to which the EU funding shall be awarded;
Amendment 55 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 d (new)
Paragraph 6 d (new)
6 d. Highlights the relevance of duly assessing the frequency of usage as well as passenger and freight volumes for infrastructure projects, suggests that the impact of several smaller projects combined, for example smaller-scale regional projects used on a nearly daily basis by citizens, for instance for commuting, may have a higher added value than a single large transport infrastructure project, at similar levels of investment;
Amendment 58 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls for systematic independent ex post evaluation of the large transport projects co-funded by the EU and for their proper maintenance, including an updated cost-benefit analysis and a thorough analysis of the net climate impact with a life-cycle approach, calls for proper maintenance of completed projects;
Amendment 59 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Suggests using lessons learned from evaluations of ongoing TEN-T projects when considering future new large transport infrastructure projects funded by the EU, underlines the importance of ensuring that the information is shared openly and timely in order to disseminate best practices and prevent the repetition of previous mistakes, with the ultimate aim of improving the quality of large transport infrastructure projects;
Amendment 60 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7 b. Strongly suggests that large infrastructure projects be considered, monitored and evaluated also in terms of the modernisation and upgrading of connecting lines, in particular when it comes to the electrification of connecting railway lines, in order to ensure European added value both in terms of connectivity and climate goals;
Amendment 62 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Urges the Member States to make completing the core TEN-T network a key priority, while recognising the need and added value of timely and devoted funding directed at the completion of the comprehensive network in due time;
Amendment 64 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Requests that the Commission, jointly with the European Court of Auditors and OLAF, closely monitor the EU large transport infrastructure projects, as such public investments are particularly sensitive to fraud, considers this essential to ensure transparency and prevent corruption and misuse of taxpayers' money, as well as to ensure that the highest safety standards for construction workers and future users are not compromised;
Amendment 70 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls for the prioritisation of cross- border interconnectivity projects and the interconnectivity of different, including regional, smaller-scale existing infrastructure projects that still constitute a missing link and whose completion can generate further cohesion and integration, calls for the prioritisation of the interconnectivity of different transport modes, in particular to promote multimodality and a modal shift to more sustainable transport modes;
Amendment 77 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Recognises that transport and energy systems are interconnected; calls on the Commission to ensure that the trans- European energy network (TEN-E) is compatible with the TEN-T ands well as with the Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Regulation, particularly regarding zero- emission mobility, in order to foster synergies between the networks and ensure that there are no gaps in the support architecture in order to deliver strategic independence;
Amendment 89 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Highlights the need for significant investment to decarbonise the transport sector, prioritising investment in infrastructure for the most sustainable transport modes and associated technologies, for instance ensuring European funding for a timely roll-out, simultaneously onboard and trackside, of ERTMS;
Amendment 92 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12 a. Stresses the importance of ensuring that large transport infrastructure projects contribute to the promotion of active mobility, by incorporating where feasible associated infrastructure for active mobility, such as safe bike and walking lanes, in the overall project, and ensuring that any new project does not become a significant obstacle to existing active mobility infrastructure either in its construction phase or completion, considers that due consideration of active mobility infrastructure shall be deemed an added value of large transport infrastructure projects in application processes;
Amendment 96 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 b (new)
Paragraph 12 b (new)
12 b. Asks the Commission to fully recognise the European added value of the EuroVelo transport network, and to dedicate a larger portion of transport funding towards active mobility infrastructure such as bike infrastructure;
Amendment 97 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 c (new)
Paragraph 12 c (new)
12 c. Recognises that expanding and developing infrastructure specifically for public transport, in particular rail infrastructure, benefits a larger portion of the European population compared to transport infrastructure geared towards passenger cars and light commercial vehicles, and thus has a greater added value in terms of emissions reduction and effective use of infrastructure, space, energy, and accessibility;
Amendment 99 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12 d (new)
Paragraph 12 d (new)
12 d. Underlines that rail transport is inherently significantly less greenhouse gas intensive than road transport, by around 80% according to EEA Briefing no. 01/2021, considers therefore that, in order to align with the EU Climate Goals, CEF funding should prioritise large transport infrastructure projects in rail over large transport infrastructure projects in road;