14 Amendments of Gilles SAVARY related to 2008/2218(INI)
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the political definition of the TEN-T policy as described in Decision No 1692/96/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 July 1996 on Community guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network and Decision No 884/2004/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 amending Decision No 1692/96/EC on Community guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network led to a "wish list" of 30 priority projects inspired mainly by national interests, 1plan a dual layer network. The first one is composed of comprehensive networks for different modes and for combined transport. This global network is addressed as the scope for transport regulation and infrastructure standardisation, and for selecting projects of common interests when they fulfil certain criteria. The second layer consists of a list of 30 priority projects, which were selected for their viability and value-added for mobility and sustainable development and which are to be launched before 2010 and to be completed up to 2020; Or. en Texts approved ...
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the external competitiveness of railway and maritime freight transport as compared with road transport must be improved in order to ensure that balanced use is made of motorways, maritime routes and rail freight corridors,
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the 30 priority projects led to a proposal of the Commission to provide around EUR 20 billion000 000 000 EU funding within the 2007-2013 Financial framework which was finally reduced to around EUR 8 billionto the trans-European transport network as a whole which was finally reduced to around EUR 8 000 000 000, amongst which only EUR 5 300 000 000 for the 30 priority projects, due to the insistence of the Council,
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. having regard to the European Union’s well-known inability to comply with the rules on funding TEN-Ts laid down in its Regulation (EC) No 680/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2007 laying down general rules for the granting of Community financial aid in the field of the trans-European transport and energy networks 1, which creates uncertainty in planning the funding of projects,
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
Bb. whereas the European Union’s current budgetary procedure, in terms of both revenue and expenditure, is incompatible with the budgetary needs of a policy of trans-European transport networks that meet the needs of climate objectives and coverage of the Union’s territory,
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Agrees with the Commission that until now TEN-T priority projects and maps were mainly a composition of large and expensive national transport infrastructure projects, some of the 30 TEN-T Prior Projects not being a realistic option, other projects becoming in the meantime - and after EU enlargement in particular - very important but missing from this listthere is still a long way to go to implement the uncompleted priority projects fully - because of the considerable amounts at stake, the intrinsic long-term nature of the projects and the considerable obstacles of their launching. Besides the leverage effect of EU funding on priority projects suffered from their sprinkling over a large number of projects;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. In this respect, does not see the rationale for introducing a vague notion of TEN-T conceptual pillar overloading the list of priorities. Contrary to the goal claimed by the Commission, a pillar expressively displayed as conceptual is not in a position to improve the TEN-T policy credibility, which lies in developing concrete projects;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Rejects any dispersal of the notion of projects of common interest. The common interest of the TEN-T projects refers to their genuinely collective benefit; supports a reinforcement of the declaration of European interest, which should entail facilitating mechanisms for the individual project sections;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4c. Recognises, however, the need for a concentration and optimisation of EU funding on a core or priority network; supports consequently, for the development of the TEN-T, a solution which would comprise a global network, and a priority network identified geographically. This priority network should rely on the existing 30 priority projects and their interconnections, nodes and intermodal connecting points;
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Stresses that increased reliance on public-private partnerships and the European Investment Bank would not be a substitute for a significant portion of budgetary funding for large-scale projects with an intergenerational pay-back period, as demonstrated by the financial difficulties experienced by Eurotunnel and the problems caused for the Perpignan-Figueras concession by delays in carrying out the infrastructure work;
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 b (new)
Paragraph 17 b (new)
17b. Favours a reconsideration of the TEN-Ts budget by the Member States in the context of the mid-term review of the financial perspectives 2009-2010 over drastically cutting back other projects and the ambitions to develop railways and waterways that go hand-in-hand with them;
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 c (new)
Paragraph 17 c (new)
17c. Stresses the need to allocate a percentage of toll revenue from road infrastructure to funding TEN-T projects in order to increase the leverage effect on borrowing;
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Asks the Commission to draw up a list and/or map of regional trans-border rail- and road connections, which have deteriorated or have been dismantled or abandoned, and to launch a plan containing recommendations and possible measures on revitalising these rail connections and thus contributing to an European Union without borders and regional internal markets, favouring especially those who are interconnecting with TEN-T;