Activities of Mathieu GROSCH related to 2008/0147(COD)
Plenary speeches (1)
Charging of heavy goods vehicles (debate)
Amendments (8)
Amendment 118 #
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) In order to give the precedence to the construction of priority projects of European interestojects designed to promote sustainable mobility at large, Member States which have the possibility of applying a mark-up should use this option before levying an external cost charge. To avoid an undue charging of users, an external cost charge should not be combined with a mark-up unless the external costs exceed the amount of the mark-up already levied. In such a case, it is thus appropriate that the amount of the mark-up should be deducted from the external cost charge.
Amendment 124 #
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) Charging external costs through tolls will be more effective in influencing transport decisions if users are aware of these costs. They should accordingly be identified separately on a comprehensible statement, a bill or an equivalent document from the toll operator. Furthermore, such a document may make it easier for hauliers to pass on the cost of the external cost charge to the shipper or any other clients.
Amendment 135 #
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) In accordance with the transport policy objectives of this Directive, the additional revenue generated from an external cost charge should be used for projects with a broad Community interest and designed to promote sustainable mobility at large. Such projects should therefore relate to facilitating efficient pricing, reducing road transport pollution at source, mitigating its effects, improving CO2 and energy performance of vehicles, and developing alternative infrastructure for transport usersnd improving transport infrastructure. It includes, for example, research and development on cleaner vehicles and the implementation of the transport part of the action plans under Council Directive 96/62/EC of 27 September 1996 on ambient air quality assessment and management and Directive 2002/49/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 June 2002 relating to the assessment and management of environmental noise, which may comprise measures to mitigate traffic-based noise and air pollution around large infrastructure and in agglomerations. Earmarking this revenue does not release Member States from the obligation laid down in Article 88(3) of the Treaty to notify the Commission of certain national measures, nor does it prejudge the outcome of any procedures initiated under Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty.
Amendment 142 #
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) In order to promote interoperability of tolling arrangements, two or more Member States should be allowed to cooperate in introducing a common system of tolls, subject to compliance with certain conditions.
Amendment 153 #
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) Article 55(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 of 11 July 2006 laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1260/19999 provides that the revenue generated by charges borne directly by users must be considered in the determination of the funding-gap in the case of a revenue- generating project. However, since the revenue generated by an external cost charge is earmarked for projects aimed at reducing road transport pollution at the source, mitigating its effects, improving CO2 and energy performance of vehicles, and developing alternativend improving infrastructure for transport users, it should not be considered in the calculation of the funding-gap.
Amendment 275 #
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 2
Article 1 – point 2
Directive 1999/62/EC
Article 7e – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 7e – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the revenue generated from the mark-up is invested in financing the construction of priority projects of European interest, identified in Annex III to Decision No 1692/96/EC, whichprojects designed to promote sustainable mobility and contribute directly to the alleviation of the congestion or environmental damage and which are located in the same corridor as the road section on which the mark-up is applied;
Amendment 277 #
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 2
Article 1 – point 2
Directive 1999/62/EC
Article 7e – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 7e – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the mark-up does not exceed 15% of the weighted average infrastructure charge calculated in accordance with Article 7b(1) and Article 7d except where the revenue generated is invested in cross-border sections of priority projects of European interestojects designed to promote sustainable mobility involving infrastructure in mountainous regions, in which case the mark-up may not exceed 25%;
Amendment 363 #
Proposal for a directive – amending act
Article 1 – point 4
Article 1 – point 4
Directive 1999/62/EC
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
2. A Member State in which an external cost charge is levied shall ensure that the revenue generated by the charge is earmarked for measures aimed at facilitating efficient pricing, reducing road transport pollution at source, mitigating its effects, improving CO2 and energy performance of vehicles, and developing alternative infrastructure for transport usersnd improving transport infrastructure.