Activities of Corina CREȚU related to 2022/2021(INI)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on large transport infrastructure projects in the EU – implementation of projects and monitoring and control of EU funds
Amendments (17)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the EU’s Common Transport Policy was established to create a common transport area across Europe; whereas its priority operational objective since 2013 has been to build a ‘core network’ by 2030, and a ‘comprehensive network’ by 2050; whereas the networks include all modes of transport including maritime, rail, road and air;
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Highlights that the Union’s transport policy aims to ensure the smooth, efficient, safe and free movement of people and goods throughout the EU by means of integrated networks using all modes of transport, aiming to provide efficient, interoperable, safe and environmentally friendly mobility solutions within the EU and to create the conditions for a competitive industry generating growth and jobs;
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Higlights that the Transeuropean Transport Network (TEN-T) policy is key to the good functioning of the internal market, to the connectivity and accessibility of all regions in the UE, as well as to the socioeconomic and territorial cohesion of the EU and to the European Green Deal objectives; recalls that large infrastructure projects play a crucial role in the delivery of the TEN-T policy as they are instrumental in removing bottlenecks and eliminating missing links, and are often located on cross-border sections;
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Underlines that Member States’ transport networks cannot be looked at in isolation; stresses that the proper connectivity within and between European regions is crucial, especially with regard to Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine and the critical need to establish alternative logistics routes using various transport modes; is concerned that the current social and political post-pandemic outlook, combined with the consequences of the war, is posing a further threat to the timely completion and development of large projects; highlights, therefore that the extension of the European transport network corridors to neighbouring non-EU countries (such as Ukraine, Moldova, North Macedonia, Albania, etc.) would significantly improve the seamless functioning of the TEN-T network; Underlines that success of the large transport infrastructure projects in the EU will depend to a large extent on how well it succeeds in connecting the infrastructure of the Eastern Member States to that of the Western European Union;
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Underlines that Member States’ transport networks cannot be looked at in isolation since a Europe-wide transport network has been clearly acknowledged as vision whose benefits go beyond isolated national action; stresses that the proper connectivity within and between European regions is crucial, especially with regard to and has been proven especially with the COVID-19 pandemic crisis as well as with Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine and the critical need to establish alternative logistics routes using various transport modes; is concerned that the current social and political post-pandemic outlook, combined with the consequences of the war, is posing a further threat to the timely completion and development of large projects; highlights, therefore that the extension of the European transport network corridors to neighbouring non-EU countries (such as Ukraine, Moldova, North Macedonia, Albania, etc.) would significantly improve the seamless functioning of the TEN-T network;
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Underlines that any extension of the TEN-T network- maritime, river or road should be done with the agreement of the countries concerned and respecting the International Agreements in force;
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Highlights, that the EU is currently experiencing an unprecedented situation whereby numerous sources of funding must be absorbed simultaneously and that Member States often do not have theshould have proper administrative capacity to handle all the funding available from the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) through the national recovery and resilience plans while trying to absorb EUR 392 billion of cohesion policy funding before the end of 2027; is concerned by the clear competition betweeNotes that within the 2021-2027 cohesion funds and NextGenerationEU (NGEU), as Member States have to prioritise funding instruments by their eligibility deadline; calls for synergies between cohesion funding and the RRF (the largest instrument in the NGEU package), with coherence, convergence and coordination between the two, in order to increase the impact of investments on the ground and avoid double funding;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Highlights, further, that FAST (Flexible Assistance for Territories) - CARE is providing the possibility to phase in delayed projects from the 2014-2020 period to the 2021-2027 period; draws attention, nevertheless, to the fact that the possible net reduction of the respective allocations in the current period is putting at risk the EU budget and its implementation;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recalls that in the EU, the competence to implement projects lies with the Member States; further recalls that Member States should ensure a coherence between their national transport and investments plans with the EU transport objectives in order to accelerate the implementation of large infrastructure transport projects and the finalisation of the TEN-T; highlights that the Commission has for this purpose appointed European coordinators to facilitate the implementation of all infrastructure projects along each of the nine core transport network corridors set out in the TEN-T Regulation; is concerned about the risk of misalignment between the EU’s and Member States’ strategic priorities and call for a subsequent reinforcement of the role of European Coordinators in order to facilitate the deployment of infrastructure projects along the TEN-T corridors;
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Is concerned by the limited CommissionStresses that the Commission should have a more prominent role in the oversight of project planning and implementation along transport network corridors, as Member States’ priorities are often mainly determined in the national context and may thus neglect cross-border sections where EU co-funded large infrastructure projects are located; highlights the risk of decreased utility derived from the use of EU funds if adequate performance is not achieved; believes that in order to address this issue, the coherence between national transport plans and investments and EU priorities should be strengthened, as should the conditionality of EU funding on engagement with EU priorities in terms of transport infrastructure deployment;
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Acknowledges that according to the European Court of Auditors (ECA), large transport projects require significant implementation time; notes that according to the European Court of Auditors,ECA the average expected construction time for the audited EU co-funded large transport projects up to 2020 was 15 years, due in part to significant delays (of up to 11 years) compared with the initial schedules and that the average delay was 11 years and that such delays put the efficiency of EU co-funding at risk; highlights that this timeframe excludes the planning period, when projects can also receive EU co- funding for actions such as studies; notes that as the EU co-funding is organised around the seven-year multiannual financial framework period, large transport projects are often co-funded via several subsequent grants, each requiring a new project proposal and selection process; is concerned that this leads to duplication of effort for the project promoters and public authorities, increasing the administrative burden; notes with concern that such delays put the efficiency of EU co-funding at risk; urges Member States to implement Directive 2021/1187 on streamlining measures for advancing the realisation of the TEN-T in order to enable simplified and harmonised permitting procedures and prevent delays in the projects;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Stresses, moreover, that many EU co-funded projects are subject to cost overruns compared to initial estimates at the project planning stage; highlights that this will become even more problematic in the post-COVID-19 environment and in the context of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; points especially to the rising inflation rates and the increasing costs of construction and raw materials, and their impact on project budgets; draws attention to the fact that inflation represents an enormous risk to current and future infrastructure projects, which may be stalled due to the highly inflated prices of building and raw materials; calls for the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) budget to be increased to meet the additional costs stemming from inflation, as well as other geopolitical and transition needs and challenges that affect the implementation of the TEN-T;
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Notes the significant delays in the adoption of partnership agreements (PAs) and programmes in the context of cohesion policy implementation in the current programming period 2021-2027; remarks that the programmes should have been operational since January 2021; is concerned about the slow pace of implementation; acknowledges, however, that we have entered a new phase of implementation and that the Commission has so far approved 25 PAs; acknowledgwelcomes that at least 142 programmes have been submitted in the context of cohesion policy as of 25 October 2022, and that this also constitutes a considerable step forward7 ; _________________ 7 https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/2021- 2027_en#inline-nav-12; https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/in- your-country/programmes_en.
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Highlights that the project monitoring performed by the European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency (CINEA) is mainly oriented towards financial aspects and outputs and does not focus on projects’ broader results and impacts; regrets that, consequently, there is only limited monitoring data that is suitable for the subsequent evaluation of these projeccalls on the Commission and CINEA to make use of more results-oriented goals and indicators to improve the potential for synergies between different funding programmes as well as to redesign the performance framework to better monitor project results;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Notes that while the Union produces systematic ex post evaluations of programmes, the Commission has not performed in a systematic method, 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; highlights that these ex post assessments could increase transparency on the effectiveness of the projects and allow deriving lessons-learnt for future large infrastructure projects;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Calls for complete alignment between the EU’s and Member States’ strategic priorities; regrets the Commission’s limited oversight over the planning and implementation of projects along transport network corridorcalls for a greater oversight of the Commission over the planning and implementation of projects along transport network corridors; notes that in many Member States, priority treatment is given to certain project categories based on their strategic importance, characterised by shorter timelines, simultaneous and/or simplified procedures; considers that when such a framework exists within a national legal framework, it should automatically apply to projects on the TEN-T; calls for Member States whose national legal frameworks lack such priority treatment to establish one for transport projects; concludes that this could have a positive impact in accelerating large transport infrastructure projects;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Is concerned that long waiting times at internal EU borders negatively affect EU-funded infrastructure and decrease its overall usability, with impacts on cities and citizens, air quality and noise pollution, as well as an increased risk of road accidents, while compromising working conditions for drivers; calls, therefore, for one minute to be set as thethe establishment of a minimum EU-wide standard time for the processing of heavy-duty vehicles at EU borders, in order to help facilitate optimal usage of transport infrastructure and networks;