REPORT on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down the framework for the deployment of Intelligent Transport Systems in the field of road transport and for interfaces with other transport modes

31.3.2009 - (COM(2008)0887 – C6‑0512/2008 – 2008/0263(COD)) - ***I

Committee on Transport and Tourism
Rapporteur: Anne E. Jensen

DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down the framework for the deployment of Intelligent Transport Systems in the field of road transport and for interfaces with other transport modes

(COM(2008)0887 – C6‑0512/2008 – 2008/0263(COD))

(Codecision procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–   having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2008)0887),

–   having regard to Article 251(2) and Article 71(1) of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C6‑0512/2008),

–   having regard to Rule 51 of its Rules of Procedure,

–   having regard to the report of the Committee on Transport and Tourism (A6-0226/2009),

1.  Approves the Commission proposal as amended;

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend the proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

3.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission.

Amendment  1 Proposal for a directive Recital 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(2a) Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS) are advanced applications that without embodying intelligence as such aim to provide innovative services on transport modes and traffic management and enable various users to be better informed and make safer, more coordinated and “smarter” use of transport networks.
Justification
The ITS are advanced applications which use Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) for transport providing innovative services for transport modes and traffic management to various users, such as all travellers, road transport infrastructure users and operators, fleet managers or operators of emergency services. These advanced applications, while enabling travellers to be better informed and make safer, more coordinated and ‘smarter’ use of transport networks, do not become intelligent or confer intelligence since intelligence is a human characteristic.
Amendment  2 Proposal for a directive Recital 3 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(3a) Several advanced applications and Community mechanisms have been developed for different transport modes such as for railway transport (ERTMS and TAF-TSI), open sea and inland waterways (LRITS, SafeSeaNet, VTMIS, RIS), air transport (SESAR) and land transport, for example, livestock transport.
Justification
The amendment aims to outline the several applications that have been developed or introduced for different transport modes – ERTMS and TAF-TSI for railway transport, LRTIS, SafeSeaNet and VTMIS for maritime transport, River Information System for inland waterways transport and SESAR for air transport, and to highlight that there is no similar coherent Community framework for road transport.
Amendment  3 Proposal for a directive Recital 7 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(7a) Vehicles which are operated mainly for their historical interest and were originally registered and/or type-approved and/or put into service before the entry into force of this Directive and of its implementing measures should not be affected by the rules and procedures laid down in this Directive.
Justification
Retrofitting of ITS systems would be practically and technically impossible for many historic vehicles. Consequently these vehicles should be exempted from the requirements of this Directive.
Amendment  4 Proposal for a directive Recital 8 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(8a) It is necessary to ensure in future the interoperability of applications and services provided by ITS deployment and covering, where appropriate, the backward compatibility of ITS applications and services.
Justification
It is essential to ensure the interoperability of ITS in EU including the backward compatibility of ITS applications and services which is of paramount importance for the coherent and effective ITS deployment.
Amendment  5 Proposal for a directive Recital 12
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(12) For ITS applications and services for which accurate and guaranteed timing and positioning services are required, satellite-based infrastructures or any technology providing an equivalent level of precisions should be used.	(12) For ITS applications and services for which accurate and guaranteed timing and positioning services are required, satellite-based infrastructures or any technology providing an equivalent level of precisions, such as Dedicated Short Range Communication (DSRC) should be used.
Justification
The necessary data for secondary telematic applications can be generated using existing and time-tested technology, such as ‘Dedicated Short Range Communication’, which is expressly defined as one of three basic technologies in Directive 2004/52/EC on the inter-operability of electronic toll systems. DSRC has no downsides or limitations compared to GPS/GNSS and allows the collection of tiered data that reflect a variety of factors such as the emission category and dimensions of the vehicle, the mileage travelled, the time of the day, etc. This should in any case be clarified.
Amendment  6 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
This Directive establishes a framework for the coordinated deployment and use of intelligent transport systems within the Community and the development of the specifications necessary for that purpose.	This Directive establishes a framework for the coordinated and coherent deployment and use of intelligent transport systems, including interoperable ITS, within the Community and the development of the specifications necessary for that purpose.
Justification
The lack of effective deployment of ITS in EU, it is not only due to the absence of a coordinated development at EU level but also from the incoherent approach taken by various actors vis-à-vis ITS applications. The interoperability is a cornerstone in order to guarantee the efficient use of ITS applications and services.
Amendment  7 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
It shall apply to all intelligent transport systems in the field of road transport and interfaces with other transport modes.	It shall apply to all intelligent transport systems for travellers, vehicles and infrastructure and their interaction in the field of road transport, including urban transport, and interfaces with other transport modes.
Justification
The scope of the Directive should define explicitly that the ITS cover all road users, vehicles and infrastructure and the transport in urban areas.
Amendment  8 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	The application of this Directive and of the measures referred to in Article 4 shall be without prejudice to the requirements of the Member States relating to public order and public security.
Justification
It is necessary to exclude from the scope of the Directive, requirements of the Member States related to public order and public security.
Amendment  9 Proposal for a directive Article 2 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) "Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS)" means systems, in which information and communication technologies are applied, in support of road transport (including infrastructure, vehicles and users) and for the interfaces to other transport modes;	(a) "Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS)" means systems, in which information and communication technologies are applied, in support of road transport (including infrastructure, vehicles and users) and, traffic and mobility management and for the interfaces to other transport modes, including the provision of multimodal interoperable ticketing;
Justification
In the ITS definition it should be included also systems providing traffic management. (Multi-modality will help making transport more efficient. If applied to ticketing, it can ensure continuity of services.
Amendment  10 Proposal for a directive Article 2 – point f
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(f) "ITS user" means any user of ITS applications or services including travellers, road transport infrastructure users and operators, fleet managers and operators of emergency services;	(f) "ITS user" means any user of ITS applications or services including travellers, vulnerable transport users, road transport infrastructure users and operators, fleet managers and operators of emergency services;
Justification
It is essential to include also the vulnerable transport users under the scope of the directive.
Amendment  11 Proposal for a directive Article 2 – point h a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ha) “vulnerable transport users” means non-motorised transport users, such as pedestrians and cyclists as well as motor-cyclists and persons with disabilities or limited mobility.
Justification
It is necessary to insert the definition for the provisions on vulnerable road users.
Amendment  12 Proposal for a directive Article 2 – point h a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ha) “the minimum level of ITS applications and services” means the basic level of ITS applications and services, which are indispensable elements of the TEN-T;
Justification
It is a must to define the minimum level of ITS applications and services which can be deployed, implemented and operated by all Member States. Without this definition there are no concrete obligations. These applications and services could be co-financed by the EU. The clarification of the minimum level of ITS services is necessary to the Member States and the stakeholders too.
Amendment  13 Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure the coordinated deployment and use of interoperable ITS applications and services within the Community.	1. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure the coordinated deployment and use of effective interoperable ITS applications and services within the Community.
Justification
Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure the coordinated deployment and use of effective interoperable ITS applications and services within the Community.
Amendment  14 Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. Where possible, Member States shall ensure the backward compatibility of ITS applications and services within the Community.
Justification
The Member States should ensure the interoperability of ITS which is of paramount importance for the coherent and effective ITS deployment. In this respect, the backward compatibility of ITS applications and services should not be excluded where this is possible within the Community
Amendment  15 Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 2 - point d a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(da) avoid creating geographical fragmentation and discontinuity.
Amendment  16 Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
3. For the purpose of ITS applications and services that require global, continuous, accurate and guaranteed timing and positioning services, satellite-based infrastructures, or any technology providing equivalent levels of precisions shall be used.	3. For the purpose of ITS applications and services that require global, continuous, accurate and guaranteed timing and positioning services, satellite-based infrastructures, or any technology providing equivalent levels of precisions, such as DSRC, shall be used.
Justification
The necessary data for secondary telematic applications can be generated using other, existing and time-tested technology, such as “Dedicated Short Range Communication”, which is expressly defined as one of three basic technologies in Directive 2004/52/EC on the inter-operability of electronic toll systems. DSRC has no downsides or limitations compared to GPS/GNSS and allows the collection of tiered data that reflect a variety of factors such as the emission category and dimensions of the vehicle, the mileage travelled, the time of the day, etc. This should in any case be clarified.
Amendment  17 Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. When adopting the measures provided for in paragraphs 1 and 2 Member States shall take into account the principles set out in Annex I	4. When adopting the measures provided for in paragraphs 1 and 2 Member States shall require compliance with the principles set out in Annex I.
Justification
It is essential that Members States take the necessary measures for requiring the compliance with the basic principals set (effectiveness, cost-efficiency, geographical continuity, interoperability, degree of maturity) for the evaluation of needs.
Amendment  18 Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	4a. The Member States shall take account of the morphological particularities of geographically isolated regions and the distances that have to be covered to reach them, making an exception if need be to the cost-efficiency ratio principle referred to in Annex I;
Amendment  19 Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1, introductory wording
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. The Commission shall define specifications for the deployment and use of ITS, in particular in the following priority areas:	1. The Commission shall define specifications for the deployment and use of ITS in the following priority areas:
Justification
The four priority areas, which correspond to the relevant four actions proposed by the Commission in the Action Plan for the deployment of the ITS in Europe, where a regulatory approach is proposed through the adoption of implementing measures under the Regulatory Procedure with Scrutiny (RPS,) should be limited.
Amendment  20 Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(1a) The Commission shall define specifications for the obligatory deployment and use of the minimum level of ITS applications and services, in particular in the following areas:
	(a) the provision of EU-wide real-time traffic and travel information services,
	(b) data and procedures for the provision of free minimum universal traffic information services,
	(c) the harmonised introduction of eCall throughout Europe,
	(d) appropriate measures on secure parking places for trucks and commercial vehicles and on telematics-controlled parking and reservation systems.
	Those measures designed to amend non-essential elements of this Directive by supplementing it shall be adopted in accordance with the regulatory procedure with scrutiny referred to in Article 8(2).
Amendment  21 Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1b. The Commission shall define specifications for the necessary deployment and use of ITS beyond the minimum level of ITS applications and services in the case of Community co-financed TERN construction or maintenance.
Justification
It is important for a new TERN construction to be ‘intelligent’ from the beginning. An impact assessment should be prepared related to the necessary ITS deployment.
Amendment  22 Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. The specifications shall be based on the principles set out in Annex I and shall comprise at least the core elements set out in Annex II.	2. The specifications shall comply with the principles set out in Annex I and shall comprise at least the core elements set out in Annex II.
Justification
The principles set in the Annex I (effectiveness, cost-efficiency, geographical continuity, interoperability, degree of maturity) are essential for the coherent and effective deployment of the ITS in EU. Therefore the Commission, when proposing and when adopting the specifications of ITS through RPS should ensure the compliance with these principles.
Amendment  23 Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2a. In order to ensure interoperability and the apportionment of liabilities, the Commission shall complement, where necessary, the core elements set out in Annex II with specifications for the planning, implementation and operational use of ITS services and shall stipulate the content of the services and service providers’ obligations.
Justification
The interoperability and liability issues are indentified as main (horizontal) obstacles for the ITS deployment. The amendment seeks to introduce provision for the adoption, where appropriate, of additional specifications in order to address issues of interoperability and apportionment of liabilities for the planning, implementation and operational use of the ITS services. In particular, rules on the ITS service providers should be adopted in order to ensure data protection, safety and continuity of services provided. These measures should be adopted with the RPS and will enable the safe, seamless and efficient operation of ITS services in EU.
Amendment  24 Proposal for a directive Article 4 - paragraph 2 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2b. The specifications shall also determine the conditions under which Member States may, in conjunction with the Commission, impose additional rules for the provision of such services throughout or in part of their territory.
Justification
In view of the nature of the service provided and local particularities, the Member States should be able to decide on particular rules within the meaning of Article 3, for instance on a minimum quality level suited to the context. Such rules will take account of the particular needs expressed by the local authorities. Implementing these requirements will call for the exchange of information between the Member States and with the Commission, which will in some cases need to set up data exchange networks.
Amendment  25 Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 2 c (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2c. Additional principles and/or core elements of specifications not provided for in this Directive should be added to Annex I and/or II in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 251 of the Treaty.
Justification
The principles on ITS deployment as referred to in Article 3 and the core elements of the specifications as referred to in Article 4 contain the basic provisions of this Directive. Any additional elements should be added to the Annexes I and II in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 251 of the Treaty (codecision procedure).
Amendment  26 Proposal for a directive Article 4 – paragraph 2 c (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2c. The Commission shall conduct a suitable impact assessment prior to the adoption of the specifications referred to in paragraphs 2a and 2b.
Justification
Before adopting the specifications, the Commission should conduct an impact assessment comprising a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis for the implementing measures provided in Article 4. The impact assessment would address issues of additional economic costs to be borne by the economic actors and parameters related to the economic cycle of the ITS.
Amendment  27 Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 1a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. For ITS equipment and software applications referred to in paragraph 1, the relevant specifications on liability shall be communicated to the national bodies responsible for the type-approval of ITS equipment and software applications covered by this Directive.
Justification
The question of liabilities of the ITS applications and services has to be addressed since it constitutes one of the main barriers for the effective ITS deployment. This provision would cover mainly the nomadic devices and infrastructure equipment.
Amendment  28 Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. Member States shall notify to the Commission the national bodies responsible for the type-approval of ITS equipment and software applications covered by this Directive. The Commission shall communicate such information to the other Member States.	2. Member States shall notify to the Commission the national bodies responsible for the type-approval of ITS equipment and software applications, including for the accreditation of ITS software application suppliers, covered by this Directive. The Commission shall communicate such information to the other Member States.
Justification
Type-approval is worthwhile for intelligent transport equipment. But in view of the developing nature of software applications, the accreditation of suppliers by the Member States would seem more relevant.
Amendment  29 Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	3a. ITS equipment and software may be placed on the market and put into service only if, when properly installed and maintained and used for their intended purpose, they do not endanger the health and safety of persons and the environment, in accordance with relevant Community legislation, and, where appropriate, property.
Justification
When ITS equipment and software are placed in the market it should be guaranteed that they do not endanger the health and safety of persons and the environment, in accordance with relevant Community acts and, where appropriate, property. This is a general requirement that applies to various sectors and products in the EU.
Amendment  30 Proposal for a directive Article 5 – paragraph 3 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	3b. ITS equipment and software shall be presumed to meet the adopted specifications as provided for by Article 4 if they conform to where available, the relevant national or European standards in accordance with Directive 98/34/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 June 1998 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations and rules on Information Society services 1.
	1 OJ L 204, 21.7.1998, p. 37.
Justification
The Commission proposal does not foresee explicitly rules for the adoption of ITS technical specifications and standards on ITS. While there should be no limitation for the adoption of such requirements by this Directive, it is necessary to refer to existing procedures that enable products or services to be presumed to meet the harmonised standards adopted by national or the European standardisation bodies: European Committee for Standardisation( CEN), European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardisation (Cenelec), European Telecommunications Standards Institute(ETSI).
Amendment  31 Proposal for a directive Article 5 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 5a
	Committee on technical standards and regulations
	Where a Member State or the Commission considers that the standards referred to in Article 5 (3b) do not entirely meet the adopted specifications as provided for by Article 4, the Member State concerned or the Commission shall inform the Standing Committee set up by Article 5 of Directive 98/34/EC giving the reasons therefor. The Committee shall issue an opinion as a matter of urgency.
	Taking into account the Committee’s opinion, the Commission shall notify the Member States as to whether or not those standards should be withdrawn from the communications referred to in Article 5 of this Directive.
Justification
The amendment aims to enhance the standardisation of ITS and would provide the possibility of using the Standing Committee and the procedure referred to in Article 5 of Directive 98/34/EC laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations and of rules on Information Society services.
Amendment  32 Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Member States shall ensure that the processing of personal data in the context of the operation of ITS is carried out in accordance with the Community rules protecting the freedoms and fundamental rights of individuals, in particular Directives 95/46/EC and 2002/58/EC.	1. Member States shall ensure that the collection, storage and processing of personal data in the context of the operation of ITS is carried out in accordance with the Community rules protecting the freedoms and fundamental rights of individuals, in particular Directives 95/46/EC and 2002/58/EC.
Justification
It is important to put safeguards to the privacy of the individual and ensure the compliance with the EC legislation on the personal data protection while ensuring the appropriate operation of ITS applications and services.
Amendment  33 Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. In order to ensure privacy, the use of anonymous data shall be encouraged, where appropriate, for the performance of the ITS application and/or service :
Justification
It is important to put safeguards to the privacy of the individual and ensure the compliance with the EC legislation on the personal data protection while ensuring the appropriate operation of ITS applications and services.
Amendment  34 Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1b. Personal data shall only be processed insofar as processing is necessary for the performance of the ITS application and/or service.
Justification
It is important to put safeguards to the privacy of the individual and ensure the compliance with the EC legislation on the personal data protection while ensuring the appropriate operation of ITS applications and services.
Amendment  35 Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 1 c (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1c. Where special categories of data referred to under Article 8 of Directive 95/46/EC are involved, such data shall only be processed where the data subject has given his or her explicit consent to the processing of those data on an informed basis.
Justification
It is important to put safeguards to the privacy of the individual and ensure the compliance with the EC legislation on the personal data protection while ensuring the appropriate operation of ITS applications and services.
Amendment  36 Proposal for a directive Article 6 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
2. In particular, Member States shall ensure that ITS data and records are protected against misuse, including unlawful access, alteration or loss.	2. Member States shall ensure that ITS data and records are protected against misuse, including unlawful access, alteration or loss and may not be used for purposes other than those referred to in this Directive.
Justification
To strengthen data protection. Some ITS users, such as fleet managers as defined by Article 2(f), must not be allowed to use ITS services to monitor employees.
Amendment  37 Proposal for a directive Article 7
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
Article 7	deleted
Amendment procedure
The Commission may amend the Annexes in order to reflect the experience gained from the application of this Directive and may further adapt the Annexes to technical progress.
Those measures designed to amend non-essential elements of this Directive, inter alia by supplementing it, shall be adopted in accordance with the regulatory procedure with scrutiny referred to in Article 8(2).
Justification
Annexes I and II, i.e. the principles on ITS deployment as referred to in Article 3 and the core elements of the specifications as referred to in Article 4, are basic provisions of this Directive. Therefore, the annexes should not be amended through Comitology with the RPS, and the procedure referred to in Article 251 of the Treaty – codecision procedure – should apply.
Amendment  38 Proposal for a directive Article 7 a (new) - paragraph 1 (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	Article 7a
	1. The Commission shall prepare an annual work programme on the basis of the core elements set out in Annex II to this Directive and for the first time three months at the latest after the entry into force of this Directive.
Justification
A work programme is necessary in order to include on an annual basis the implementing measures of the ITS specifications that should be adopted. This will enable to have a link between the core elements of ITS and the deadlines for the delivery of results. The first programme on the core elements for ITS deployment should be adopted not later than three months after the entry into force of this Directive.
Amendment  39 Proposal for a directive Article 7 a (new) - paragraph 2 (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	2. The Commission shall take into account the results of the work conducted by committees established in accordance with other Community acts, relating to the different areas of ITS, including the European ITS Advisory Group referred to in Article 9.
Justification
A general obligation for taking into account the results of the work from relevant committees established in the framework of other EC directives, regulations or decisions, e.g., on electronic road toll systems, on harmonised river information services (RIS) on inland waterways, on type approval of motor vehicles, or TEN-T, is required in order to ensure a coherent deployment and create synergies. In this respect, the work of the ITS advisory group would be valuable guidance for drafting the implementing measures.
Amendment  40 Proposal for a directive Article 7 a (new) - paragraph 3 (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	3. The Commission shall, in close cooperation with the Member States, ensure general consistency and complementarity of ITS deployment with other relevant Community policies, programmes and actions.
Justification
The Commission should, in close cooperation with the Member States, ensure the consistency and complementarity of ITS deployment with other EC policies and initiatives, thus enhancing synergies and the effectiveness of EC policies.
Amendment  41 Proposal for a directive Article 7 a (new) - paragraph 4 (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	4. The Commission shall cooperate actively with European and international standardisation bodies on the provisions set out in Annexes I and II.
Justification
There is a need to address issues related to the cooperation with international organisations on the field of ITS and standardisation.
Amendment  42 Proposal for a directive Article 7 a (new) - paragraph 5 (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	5. The Commission shall act in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 8(1a) for the purposes of:
	(a) adopting and amending the annual work programmes;
	(b) determining the priority areas for international cooperation.
	The annual work programme and the priority areas for international cooperation shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Justification
This amendment introduces the regulatory procedure for the decisions related to the annual programme and the priority areas for international cooperation. Both decisions have to be published in the Official Journal in order to ensure information for all interested parties and transparency on the work of ITS deployment.
Amendment  43 Proposal for a directive Article 7 a (new) – paragraph 6 (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
.	6. In accordance with the regulatory procedure with scrutiny referred to in Article 8(2), the Commission shall, no later than six months following the entry into force of this Directive, adopt a working programme with targets and deadlines for implementing Annex II.
Justification
Annex II does not list the priorities in order of preference or give deadlines for their implementation. So the Commission, together with the ITS Committee, should lay down targets and deadlines for implementation. The working programme may need adjustment in the light, for instance, of technological developments and the progress of the work. This means making provision for the option of periodical review of the working programme.
Amendment  44 Proposal for a directive Article 8 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. Where reference is made to this paragraph, Articles 5 and 7 of Decision 1999/468/EC shall apply, having regard to the provisions of Article 8 thereof.
	The period laid down in Article 5(6) of Decision 1999/468/EC shall be set at three months.
Justification
The amendment introduces the references to the Directive related to the regulatory procedure (Decision 1999/468/EC) for the decisions on the annual programme and the priority areas for international cooperation. The period for the ‘droit de regard’ is proposed to be set at three months.
Amendment  45 Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 1a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1a. The Commission shall ensure that the representatives of the European ITS Advisory Group are competent and that the Group includes adequate representation from those sectors of industry and of those users affected by measures which might be proposed by the Commission under this Directive.
Justification
The Commission should enhance adequate participation of ITS stakeholders in the European ITS Advisory Group.
Amendment  46 Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1b. The European ITS Advisory Group shall be called upon to provide a technical opinion on the drafting of the specifications referred to under Article 4.
Justification
The Directive should provide the European ITS Advisory Group with the possibility of issuing opinions on Commission's draft texts of the specifications set out in Article 4.
Amendment  47 Proposal for a directive Article 9 – paragraph 1 c (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	1c. The work of the European ITS Advisory Group shall be carried out in a transparent manner.
Justification
Transparency and openness have to accompany the work of the ITS Advisory Group.
Amendment  48 Proposal for a directive Article 10 – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
4. The Commission shall report bi-annually to the European Parliament and to the Council.	4. The Commission shall report bi-annually to the European Parliament and to the Council on the progress made for the implementation of this Directive accompanied by an analysis on the functioning of the rules set out in Annexes I and II and shall assess the need to amend this Directive.
	In particular the Commission shall report bi-annually to the European Parliament and to the Council on the status of funding, and if necessary the Commission shall make a proposal for the financial basis of the implementation of the minimum level of ITS applications and services
Justification
The reports to the EP and the Council should include explicitly the state of implementation of the ITS deployment as well as an analysis on the functioning of the rules set out in Annexes I and II and assess the need to amend this Directive. This will make it possible better to monitor and identify the core progress and check the implementation of the objectives of the Directive and prepare possible intervention on the basis of a sound evaluation. The funding of the minimum level of ITS service is a crucial question. The Commission should report on this issue regularly.
Amendment  49 Proposal for a directive Article 11 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1. Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by [24 months after entry into force of this Directive] at the latest. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions and a correlation table between those provisions and this Directive.	1. Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by [12 months after entry into force of this Directive] at the latest. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions and a correlation table between those provisions and this Directive.
Justification
The period of 24 months is too long for the transposition period.
Amendment  50 Proposal for a directive Annex I - point a
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(a) Effectiveness – the ability to make a tangible contribution towards solving the key challenges affecting road transportation in Europe (e.g. reducing congestion, lowering of emissions, improving energy efficiency, attaining higher levels of safety and security);	(a) Effectiveness – the ability to make a tangible contribution towards solving the key challenges affecting road transportation in Europe (e.g. reducing congestion, lowering of emissions, improving energy efficiency, attaining higher levels of safety and security, addressing issues related to vulnerable transport users);
Justification
It is essential to include under the evaluation needs issues related to vulnerable transport users, including persons with reduced mobility.
Amendment  51 Proposal for a directive Annex I – point c
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(c) Geographical continuity – the ability to ensure seamless services across the Community, in particular on the trans-European transport network;	(c) Geographical continuity – the ability to ensure seamless services across the Community and at its external borders, in particular on the trans-European transport network;
Justification
To be able to use ITS applications and services at the EU external borders is almost as important as inside the EU. Cross-border cooperation is necessary both at administrative and technical level.
Amendment  52 Proposal for a directive Annex I – point e a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ea) Intermodality – shifting freight from road to short sea shipping, rail, inland waterways or a combination of modes of transport in which road journeys are as efficient as possible.
Justification
The scope of the Directive is to apply to all ITS in the field of road transport and interfaces with other transport modes. It is therefore essential to insert the intermodality also in the ITS deployment principles of the Directive.
Amendment  53 Proposal for a directive Annex II – paragraph 2 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(b) The definition of the necessary measures to use innovative ITS technologies (RFID or Galileo/EGNOS) in the realisation of ITS applications (notably the tracking and tracing of freight along its journey and across modes) for freight transport logistics (eFreight), in particular:	(b) The definition of the necessary measures to use innovative ITS technologies (RFID, DSRC or Galileo/EGNOS) in the realisation of ITS applications (notably the tracking and tracing of freight along its journey and across modes) for freight transport logistics (eFreight), in particular:
– The availability of relevant ITS technologies to and their use by ITS application developers	– The availability of relevant ITS technologies to and their use by ITS application developers
– The integration of localisation results (through e.g. RFID and/or Galileo/EGNOS) in the traffic management tools and centres	– The integration of localisation results (through e.g. RFID, DSRC and/or Galileo/EGNOS) in the traffic management tools and centres
Justification
The integration of localisation results based on DSRC is in fact already implemented in traffic management tools and centres and should therefore be explicitly mentioned.
Amendment  54 Proposal for a directive Annex II – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ca) The definition of the necessary measures to ensure seamless ITS services within the Community and at its external borders.
Justification
To be able to use ITS applications and services at the EU external borders is almost as important as inside the EU. Cross-border cooperation is necessary both at administrative and technical level.
Amendment  55 Proposal for a directive Annex II – paragraph 3 – point b a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(ba) The definition of measures to guarantee the safety of vulnerable transport users, , through the use of mobility management systems for service providers and users with respect to Advanced Driving Assistance Systems (ADAS) deployment and HMI.

Amendment  56 Proposal for a directive Annex II – part 4 – point b - indent 4 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	The definition of a regulatory framework on the human machine interface (HMI) to address the liability issues and provide a more reliable adjustment of ITS functional safety features to human behaviour

EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

The Commission proposal for a Directive laying down the framework for the deployment of Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS) in the field of road transport and for interfaces with other transport modes[1] aims to ensure the tans-national deployment of ITS applications and harmonised cross-border services for traffic and travel information and traffic management.

ITS are advanced applications which use Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) for transport and provide innovative services on transport modes and traffic management to various users, such as travellers, road transport infrastructure users and operators, fleet managers and operators of emergency services.

ITS applications have proven their effectiveness by making transport more efficient, safer and secure while they contribute to the policy objective of making transport cleaner. But their benefits for the users and for the infrastructure in Europe are not optimised.

In the impact assessment of the ITS Directive[2], the Commission describes the growing challenges that transport policy faces - Road traffic congestion yearly amounts on average to 1% of the GDP in the EU, road fatalities still amount 42 953 (2006) far above the intermediate target set to reduce to 25.000 in 2010, CO2 emissions in road transport accounts for 72% of all transport-related CO2 emissions.

In particular, the Commission notes that the development of ITS is slower than expected and services are deployed on a fragmented basis creating a patchwork of national, regional and local solutions which endangers the integrity of the single market. The areas where the Commission identifies main obstacles for promoting ITS are the lack of interoperability and effective cooperation among stakeholders, unsolved data privacy and liability issues.

In order to accelerate the coordinated deployment of ITS and address barriers to the development of ITS, the Commission proposes a Directive as legislative instrument respecting the proportionality and subsidiarity principles.

Aim and objectives

The proposal aims to put in place necessary mechanisms to foster ITS applications and services for road transport and their interconnections with other modes of transport.

The proposal sets obligations for Member States to ensure the coordinated deployment and use of interoperable ITS applications and services. It is suggested that Member States ITS deployment should take into account key principles as the effectiveness, the cost-efficiency, geographical continuity and interoperability, the degree of maturity set out in annex (I).

Common specifications

It is important to underline the link between the Directive on ITS and the Action plan for the deployment of ITS in Europe since there is explicit provision (Article 4) for the implementation of priorities areas of the action plan through implementing measures.

The adoption of common specifications through implementing measures at the EU level by a European ITS Committee (EIC) with regulatory procedure with scrutiny covers, in particular, four priority areas:

1. Optimal use of road, traffic and travel data

2. Continuity of traffic and freight management ITS services in European transport corridors and conurbations

3. Road safety and security applications of ITS

4. Integration of the vehicle into the transport infrastructure.

The four priority areas where common specifications are to be provided are identical to four out of the six actions areas proposed in the action plan. Their core elements are specified in an annex (II).

The mutual recognition of type approvals issued by the national bodies is proposed to cover road infrastructure related equipment and software (Article 5). The Directive makes reference to the framework directives on data security and protection aiming to ensure privacy and security (Article 6). It is also proposed to establish a European ITS advisory group to advise the Commission.

The Rapporteur's views

The directive is an appropriate legislative instrument to advance ITS in EU with a more coordinated and coherent way.

There is a clear need to ensure more interoperable ITS applications and services in Europe, including backward compatibility where this is possible. Information to all travellers and for all modes of transport, enhance co-modality and it is essential to create a more competitive and efficient environment for transport infrastructure. Coherence between the experiences derived by stakeholders and from the action plan and standardisation work should be ensured.

While the need for a regulatory approach to the ITS deployment is not contested the content of the implementing specifications should be limited. On the data protection it is necessary to consider the use of anonymous data, the consent of the users and to consider the respect to privacy at early stage of the design of ITS.

Liability issues need to be addressed through the appropriate involvement of the experts on the field and from all stakeholders. There is also a need to strike an appropriate balance for the representation between all stakeholders of ITS in the European ITS advisory group, to give more formal advising role and more transparency.

In order to enhance the safety of the vulnerable users the relevant framework for the HMI should be strengthened more in the actions provided for common specifications.

• [1]  COM(2008) 0887.
• [2]  SEC (2008)3083 and SEC(2008)3084.

PROCEDURE

Title	Intelligent Transport Systems in the field of road transport and interfaces with other transport modes
References	COM(2008)0887 – C6-0512/2008 – 2008/0263(COD)
Date submitted to Parliament	16.12.2008
Committee responsible        Date announced in plenary	TRAN 13.1.2009
Committee(s) asked for opinion(s)        Date announced in plenary	ITRE 13.1.2009
Not delivering opinions        Date of decision	ITRE 19.1.2009
Rapporteur(s)        Date appointed	Anne E. Jensen 8.12.2008
Discussed in committee	17.2.2009		30.3.2009
Date adopted	31.3.2009
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	32 2 0
Members present for the final vote	Gabriele Albertini, Inés Ayala Sender, Paolo Costa, Luis de Grandes Pascual, Petr Duchoň, Saïd El Khadraoui, Robert Evans, Emanuel Jardim Fernandes, Francesco Ferrari, Brigitte Fouré, Mathieu Grosch, Georg Jarzembowski, Stanisław Jałowiecki, Timothy Kirkhope, Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou, Jörg Leichtfried, Eva Lichtenberger, Marian-Jean Marinescu, Erik Meijer, Luís Queiró, Reinhard Rack, Ulrike Rodust, Gilles Savary, Brian Simpson, Renate Sommer, Dirk Sterckx, Ulrich Stockmann, Michel Teychenné, Yannick Vaugrenard, Roberts Zīle
Substitute(s) present for the final vote	Elisabeth Jeggle, Anne E. Jensen, Marie Panayotopoulos-Cassiotou
Substitute(s) under Rule 178(2) present for the final vote	Elisabeth Schroedter
Date tabled	3.4.2009