Activities of Mikuláš PEKSA related to 2022/2021(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Large transport infrastructure projects in the EU (debate)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on large transport infrastructure projects in the EU – implementation of projects and monitoring and control of EU funds
Amendments (9)
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Reminds that large transport infrastructure contribute to the sustainable development of European regions by enhancing green connectivity, which contributes to protecting the environment though the reduction of CO2 emissions;
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Welcomes the number of high impact, successful projects co-financed by the EU budget; notes, in particular, the impact of projects such as: the construction of a high-speed railway platform (Spain, EUR 749 million); the doubling of the ‘Bari s. Andrea bitetto’ railway section (Italy, EUR 421 million); the construction of a new Route du Littoral (France, EUR 304 million); the modernisation of the Sofia-Plovdiv railway line: railway section Elin Pelin – Kostenets (Bulgaria, EUR 553 million); the construction of an express road between Craiova and Pitesti (Romania, EUR 832 million); the construction of the S7 expressway between Gdańsk and Elbląg, and Thorns and Elbląg (Poland, EUR 504 million); the improvement of TEN-T road connectivity with South Dalmatia (Croatia, EUR 418 million); works on the D35 motorway in the section MÚK Opatovice-Časy-Ostrov (Czechia, EUR 384 million); the construction of the Patras Pyrgos motorway (Greece, EUR 355 million); the modernisation of the railway line between Púchov and Žilina (Slovakia, EUR 349 million); upgrading the existing Maribor- Šentilj railway (Slovenia, EUR 195 million); modernising the Ovar-Gaia railroad (Portugal, EUR 140 million); carrying out stage III of the western bypass of Vilnius (Lithuania, EUR 92 million); works on state road No 2, Tallinn-Tartu- Võru-Luhamaa Võõbu-Mäo (Estonia, EUR 59 million); the construction of the main state motorway, A2 Riga-Sigulda-Estonian border (Latvia, EUR 44 million); and the construction of a multi-level road junction at EA20A & EA21 along the TEN-T (Malta, EUR 41 million); also points out to the role that the EIB plays in supporting innovative and sustainable infrastructure projects in the Member States, both on national and local level;
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Highlights that the project monitoring performed by the European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency is mainly oriented towards financial aspects and outputs and does not focus on projects’ broader results and impacts, such as on the local population and the environment; regrets that, consequently, there is only limited monitoring data that is suitable for the subsequent evaluation of these projects;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. NotesFinds it concerning that while the Union produces systematic ex post evaluations of programmes, the Commission has not performed, nor has it required project promoters to perform, systematic ex post assessments of individual EU co-funded large transport projects; notes that there is currently no legal obligation for them to do so;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Is convinced that adequate control over fund implementation is a necessity as infrastructure projects are prone to irregularities including corruption; calls on the Commission and the Member States to put into mandatory use an open-source single integrated, interoperable information and monitoring system, including a single data-mining and risk-scoring tool to access and analyse the relevant data, including information on beneficial ownership, and increase control reliability, with a view to a generalised application, including with the help of the Technical Support Instrument; emphasises that such data should allow for the strengthening of the control and audit processes, notably as regards fraud and conflicts of interest;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Expresses its concern that there is a lack of systematic evaluation of large transport projects in the EU and that existing monitoring is focused mainly on financial inputs and outputs rather than outcomes; calls for the outcomes of such projects to be given greater visibility, as they play a significant role in building long-term socio-economic and environmental benefits; calls, additionally, for a review of the long-term benefits of large transport projects and for the evaluation of any benefits that are additional to the direct benefits produced by such projects8 ; _________________ 8 ITF (2014), Major Transport Infrastructure Projects and Economic Development, ITF Round Tables, No. 154, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789282107720-en.
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Calls on the Commission to further strengthen ex post evaluation indicators by introducing criteria such as road safety; reduction of deaths and serious injuries; reduction of emissions; reduction of noise pollution; increase in the quality of air, and increase in economic activity; notes, in this regard, that the lack of effective enforcement related to the quality of infrastructure is a significant additional contributor to poor road safety resulting in deaths and injuries; believes that measuring economic and environmental impacts through regional or national macroeconomic models could assist in alleviating any potential risks arising from the lack of scrutiny9 ; _________________ 9 ibid.
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25 a. Calls on the Commission to focus on the development of cross-border transport infrastructure to ensure a better and greener connectivity in Europe; recommends increasing the availability of international night trains to provide sustainable transport alternatives;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 b (new)
Paragraph 25 b (new)
25 b. Believes that given the limited administrative capacity of Member States to handle all the funding available, a separate budget should be allocated for national and regional administrative tasks required to develop large-scale transport infrastructure projects, especially to help secure land sales agreements and avoid corruption of public officials;