19 Amendments of Niklas NIENASS related to 2022/2023(INI)
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Points out that the European Green Deal, the Sustainable and Smart Mobility Strategy and the new EU Urban Mobility Framework acknowledge the importance of safe, accessible and inclusive urban mobility in the green and digital transitions; urges the Commission to spell out specific social and physical accessibility measures more clearly;
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Requests a public transport system accessible for all citizens, through inclusion by design, especially taking into account persons with disabilities; stresses the benefits of including users from an early stage of planning of infrastructure and transport services; confirms the importance of accessibility outlined within the framework of the European Disability Strategy 2021-2030 (EDS) and the European Accessibility Act; points out the importance of projects such as the "Access City Award";
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Calls for an EU-wide exchange of best practices on the affordability of public transport; further asks the European Commission to conduct a study on the feasibility of implementing a free public transport system across the EU in order to incentivise modal shift;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Commission to make social equity one of the central points in the development of Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans (SUMPs), as these have a greater impact on regional areas outside the RTEN-T nodes and include a greater number of municipalities, towns and functional areas;
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Encourages Member States and local authorities to join forces to promote and implement SUMPs, which should incorporate concrete objectives and related targets in terms of a modal shift towards active mobility and public transport, whose full fleet should progressively become zero-emissions before 2030;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2 c. Highlights that urban infrastructure planning should contribute to a smart and sustainable transport transition, allowing for multimodality and ensuring quality of life in cities; recommends, in this regard, incorporating active mobility and micro-mobility, as well as underdeveloped sustainable transport modes, into sustainable urban mobility plans, reducing the current centrality of private cars and re-gaining public space which can be repurposed for green areas, sustainable urban drainage systems, and cultural and commercial activities;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4 b. Recognises that public space shall be first and foremost reserved for human beings and their social and cultural activities, not for machines and inactive, non-effective capital; notes that children and elderly people can be unsafe on public roads due to recklessness of car drivers; stresses that local authorities should ensure that public spaces, especially what is currently being used as roads and parking spaces, should be freed of traffic as much as possible and reused for citizens’ commute, sports, culture, socialising, and for children's play; points out that these changes in the usage of public space should be made through a bottom-up approach in which citizens and different communities are part of the changes; reminds local and regional authorities that ERDF and ESF(+) funding allows for the usage of CLLD instruments and even encourages this by granting an additional 10% points co- financing for such programmes;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Stresses that urban mobility ambitions and targets require adequate, long-term financing, even more so in light of rising costs due to the energy crisis provoked by the war in Ukraine, as well as other non-financial support instruments; calls, in this regard, for a mix of sufficient public national and European funding, including the involvement of the European Investment Bank, and the swift implementation of the relevant existing EU programmes and projects, allowing an increase in the funding available, including direct allocation to local authorities where possible, while paying particular attention to the needs of smaller cities and towns; further calls for ambitious urban mobility financing beyond the 2021-2027 multiannual financial framework;
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5 b. Considers that effective CO2 taxes are an important tool of climate-friendly mobility policies; insists in this regard that revenues from CO2 taxes should be channelled into the funding of rail, public transport and cycling network funding in order to accelerate the necessary modal shift within the ecological transition;
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5 c. Calls for measures minimising the volume of private mobility, including further deploying a reliable and punctual network of efficient, comfortable, accessible and affordable public transport services with enough frequency, complemented by other active and zero- emission modes of transport that bring various flexible options, coordinated by local public transport authorities, in order to provide better and more valuable solutions for citizens;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 d (new)
Paragraph 5 d (new)
5 d. Stresses in this regard the important role that urban, sub-urban and regional trains have to play further in terms of daily commuting to and from urban areas; insists that adequate investments need to be guaranteed in order to ensure a reliable service in terms of frequency and punctuality, as well as adapting rolling stock, where necessary, to enable sufficient space for well- designed and secure bike parking, in order to allow a substantial increase in the use of rail and bicycles in combination;
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 e (new)
Paragraph 5 e (new)
5 e. Highlights the importance of shared mobility hubs on public transport stations to solve the “Last Mile Problem,” particularly present in decently populated rural areas, to provide physical connectivity for all citizens wherever they decide to live without the need for usage of private cars; highlights the necessity to create these shared mobility points for all transport modes, including bikes, cargo bikes, e-scooters, and on-demand taxis; calls on the Commission to ensure together with the member states sufficient funding for less developed regions within the framework of the Cohesion Policy;
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 f (new)
Paragraph 5 f (new)
5 f. Calls for more protected bike lanes, better bike infrastructure in urban as well as rural areas, maximisation of synergies between public transport companies which connect cities and rural areas to take cycling into account; stronger fight against organized bike theft, protection of bikers through an increase of fines for car drivers that violate or threaten bikers' rights or lives through dangerous and reckless driving; in light of the energy crisis and rising mobility costs for a lot of citizens asks the local and regional authorities to propose mobility shift schemes that support the ownership of bikes through coupons or free bike distribution; calls for more safety trainings for driving and cycling in schools;
Amendment 46 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Calls for better accessibility and connectivity between urban, peri-urban and rural areas, as well as multi-modal passenger hubs and further calls for unhindered access to smart, sustainable and affordable transport to be guaranteed for all; points out the opportunity to develop and deploy on-demand public transport services on those peri-urban and outlying rural areas and calls on the Commission to provide support for trialling such solutions and exchange best practices;
Amendment 49 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6 b. Considers that border cities should have the capacity to provide efficient and seamless cross-border daily transport while addressing missing links and bottlenecks, particularly in terms or rail infrastructure and services; and ensuring better and more sustainable connectivity between European capitals and major cities; highlights, in this regard, that high-speed train and night train services should be better deployed; stresses that one of the main competitive advantages of rail compared to aviation is that it can provide a link between city centres; urges in this regard all the concerned authorities to remove any existing barriers and accomplish this central connection in European cities where this is not yet the case;
Amendment 50 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)
Paragraph 6 c (new)
6 c. Stresses the need for better recognition of public transport tickets from different member states in border regions to secure better accessibility to cross-border public transport for all citizens; to ensure competitiveness with other modes of transportation; highlights, in this regard, the need for the creation of cross-border public transport associations, to provide one ticket solution in the cross-border regions; welcomes the b-solution initiative of the Commission and calls on the Commission to undertake further steps, including the new proposal on ECBM to secure long-term solutions for obstacles in cross-border public transport, that are according to an analysis of the Commission on b-solution studies mainly caused by incompatible laws of different member states;