Verbatim report of proceedings

Tuesday, 22 February 2005 - Strasbourg

18. River Traffic Information Services

  President. – The next item is the report (A6-0055/2004), by Mrs Renate Sommer, on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on harmonised River Traffic Information Services on inland waterways in the Community.

  Barrot, Vice-President of the Commission. (FR) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I am delighted to be able to present this proposal for a directive on river information services to you today. Its aim is to harmonise information services on inland waterways in the Community, and indeed Parliament called for such a directive in its resolution on the White Paper on European transport policy.

The Commission has acknowledged for many years that inland waterways offer enormous potential for substitution, given the problems of overuse experienced by other transport sectors. To put it another way, inland waterways transport is frequently more economical, more reliable and more environmentally friendly than other modes of transport.

River information services, which are based on modern information and communications technologies and which allow improvements to be made to the planning and management of traffic and transport, represent an outstanding opportunity for inland waterways. The services involved include the provision of information on inland waterways, conditions of navigability, the traffic situation and port and terminal capacities, as well as calamity abatement services.

River information services allow journeys to be planned more accurately and make it easier to adapt to traffic conditions and conditions of navigability, which means that they result in reduced fuel consumption, and hence in a reduction in emissions. They also make it possible to monitor the transport of hazardous goods, and, as a result, to react appropriately in the event of accidents or potential damage to the environment. The use of information services will help to modernise the river network, as well as increasing its safety, reliability and efficiency.

The directive serves a dual purpose. Firstly, it seeks to provide the governments that supply the services, the people who use them and the businesses that manufacture the relevant hardware and software with the security they need to invest in this field. Its second aim is to ensure that applications are interoperable and compatible at national and European level, and of course to ensure that continuity can be achieved with the services used by other modes of transport.

The directive does not force private users to use river information services, but we are convinced that the benefits of these services will encourage users to take advantage of them. We are also convinced that businesses will perceive RIS technology as a market opportunity, and offer it at a reasonable and affordable price. The fact that the internal waterways sector is made up mainly of small and medium-sized enterprises makes cost a key factor, and the Commission intends to monitor developments in this area closely.

The Council has reached a broad understanding, and I am delighted that the rapporteur and the committee responsible for the issue, the Committee on Transport and Tourism, have sought to reach agreement at first reading. The Council and Parliament have adopted a constructive approach that should enable us to adopt the directive without delay and to embark on the implementation of river information services. I should like to express my wholehearted thanks to Mrs Sommer and the Committee on Transport and Tourism for having supported this approach.

There are three issues that are worth emphasising; the interoperability of services, deadlines for implementation and correlation tables. Parliament was entirely right to place particular emphasis on the interoperability of services and the compatibility of equipment, as these matters lie at the very heart of the directive, and I should like to thank the rapporteur once again for this. A compromise has been reached whereby a deadline of 30 months will be set for implementation, and I believe this to be a reasonable deadline. Turning to the correlation tables, the Commission obviously regrets the fact that the obligation to provide such tables has been included only in a recital, and not in an article. Yet in spite of this difference of opinion, which must be settled at institutional level, it is our opinion that we cannot risk this directive not being adopted. Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I should like to repeat that this directive will facilitate the flow of traffic on rivers, as well as making it safer and increasing its functionality. I believe that it is crucial for us to be able to exploit this transport and mobility potential, and this is why I should like to thank this House in advance for welcoming this proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council.

  Sommer (PPE-DE), rapporteur. – (DE) Mr President, contrary to what we hear promised in political speeches and announced in policy statements, the interests of inland navigation are often neglected in practice by politicians in many Member States. As Commissioner Barrot has said, it is the Commission that has focused most sharply on the potential of this mode of transport, and a few years ago now, back in September 2001, its White Paper on European transport policy for 2010 formulated the aim of reinforcing the position of inland navigation as an alternative mode of transport to which a considerable volume of road traffic could be switched. At the present time, however, we are very far from achieving that aim. Many people evidently find it difficult to recognise the real significance of inland navigation, and yet such great importance attaches to the potential role of inland waterways in the EU.

It was therefore high time that the Commission fleshed out the statements of intent from the White Paper, which it did in May of last year in this proposal for a directive on river-traffic information services. It is about applications of modern information and communication technology that should make it easier in future for Member States to manage traffic flows and transport operations on inland waterways.

The European Union has 30 000 kilometres of canals and rivers linking hundreds of major towns, cities and industrial areas. What we might call the core network connects the Benelux countries, France, Germany and Austria with each other. Despite the enormous potential of the whole network, only 7% of all inland traffic, excluding air traffic, is carried on our inland waterways – yes, only 7%! On the other hand, in view of the increasing volume of traffic – which has been due in part to the welcome eastward enlargement of the EU – Europe’s roads, railways and air space have long been working close to maximum capacity. This makes it all the more important to promote at long last the only mode of transport that still has significant spare capacity. The present draft directive makes it possible to harness the potential of inland waterway transport more effectively and to include it in the intermodal transport chain.

Let me briefly outline some of the core points of the agreement we reached at the informal trialogue. Besides the fact that the work already done by such recognised international organisations as the Central Commission for Navigation on the Rhine is to be taken into account, we have now also agreed that these organisations will continue to be involved in the establishment of the harmonised river-traffic information services. They can advise the RIS Committee, which will ensure that a patchwork of differing systems does not develop in the European Union.

Commissioner Barrot has listed the potential applications of this RIS approach: fairway information, traffic information, traffic management, disaster-relief support – especially important, because we intend to include hazardous materials in the cargos shifted from roads to waterways – and information for transport management, statistics and customs and for waterway charges and port dues. Other service applications are possible; this list is not exhaustive.

These types of information must be made accessible to all RIS users without discrimination. Besides the legitimate public interest in details such as the precise location of vessels with cargos of hazardous materials, the equally legitimate economic interests of the interested parties – cargo shippers, fleet managers, port operators, among others – must not be forgotten either.

For this reason, we have clearly re-emphasised that data protection law does, of course, apply without exception to trade secrets such as these. Bearing in mind the structure of the sector, which is composed predominantly of small and medium-sized businesses, we have barred the fees charged for RIS information from exceeding the cost price, thus protecting the sector from excessive costs resulting from use of the system. It has to be said, though, that there was no chance whatever of getting the Council to agree to additional support for the sector, for example through supplementary aid or loans at reduced rates, which I would have thought would make perfect sense. That the Council should so abominate such things is extraordinary in view of the importance of this sector to so many Member States, but, as river traffic information services of this kind are needed without delay, we agreed to this compromise.

Let me conclude by thanking the Council, the Commission, and particularly my fellow-Members the shadow rapporteurs for the cooperation between them, which has been extraordinarily good. I extend the warmest of thanks to them, for without the cooperation of all parties the compromise we have here would not have been possible.

I would now like to appeal to the whole House to vote in accordance with my list of the original 34 amendments from the Committee on Transport and Tourism, and also to accept the 32 amendments tabled in the plenary, for these are the outcome of the informal trialogue, on which we have all agreed. As we all want to support the inland shipping sector, I think the first reading tomorrow will also be the last.

  Chichester (PPE-DE), draftsman of the opinion of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy. – Mr President, on behalf of my committee I would like to indicate support for the general aims of this proposal on river information services. I shall offer the insights gained from my own experience as an amateur rowing man and yachtsman to bear witness to the importance of information for safe and successful navigation.

Our committee was concerned about two aspects. I am grateful that the Commissioner has already mentioned one of these: our concern about the interests of SMEs and the impact this measure will have on them. Regulation and legislation always weighs more heavily on small businesses than on large organisations. I am grateful for the references to this in the main body of the report.

The second point we make concerns the general issue of comitology and the advisory committee that is proposed. It is very important that all those involved should be able to make some contribution to this advisory committee. This is a matter we have addressed in other reports on other topics in our committee and I particularly welcome the rapporteur's Amendment 29, which calls on the Commission to consult representatives of the sector regularly. SMEs and consulting are very important.

  Wortmann-Kool (PPE-DE), on behalf of the PPE-DE Group. – (NL) Thank you, Mr President, I am delighted with the agreement at first reading on River Information Services, and on behalf of the PPE-DE Group, I should also like to thank this rapporteur warmly for all her efforts and congratulate her on the result that has been achieved, for this is an important proposal for improving safety in inland navigation. Skippers will have extensive information at their disposal on water levels, lock levels and other sailing information across the whole of Europe, and thanks to this system, port and terminal businesses will be able to work more to their potential. As such, it is an important proposal to promote European inland navigation.

I think it is important that the costs of this system, both for inland navigation and the government, should be kept down. The inland navigation sector consists of independent, small enterprises with limited investment capacity, which should not be forced into expensive systems when cheaper alternatives are still available on the market.

It should be possible for skippers to use one and the same system to register with the River Traffic Information Services (RIS) in all countries, and I am pleased that this has been provided for effectively in the agreement that the rapporteur has reached on Parliament’s behalf. Furthermore, it is also very important that it be recognised that the systems used should be proof against leaks of all kinds of company-sensitive information.

I would like to support the rapporteur’s result wholeheartedly, because this directive has created a framework for River Information Services. However, much of the technical detail is yet to be worked out before the system can actually be launched. I am therefore keen to endorse Mr Chichester’s appeal that this technical detailing be practical and should tie in with the skippers’ work processes. Consultation is necessary, and I should like to urge the Commissioner to involve the inland navigation sector in this technical process. Especially now that the European Union is becoming increasingly involved in European inland navigation policy, consultation with the sector is vital with regard to this directive but also in other areas. Can you deliver on this, Commissioner? After all, successful inland navigation is essential for sustainable European transport.

  Stockmann (PSE), on behalf of the PSE Group. – (DE) Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, let me begin by thanking the rapporteur for her truly excellent cooperation with us. Inland navigation is making headway, and RIS will do a little more to dispel the image of a romantic but outdated form of transport. An interoperable cross-border information and communication system will help to realise our vision of making inland navigation as strong as any other link in the transport chain. It would be a wise move to strengthen inland waterway transport in this way, given all the infrastructural developments that are required in other areas of the transport system.

RIS brings added value in environmental and economic terms, while also contributing to the overall efficiency of transport policies. Firstly, the improvement of traffic and transport management makes it conceivable that something like the ‘just in time’ approach could be extended to supplies transported on our rivers. RIS provides up-to-date information that can be used in the planning of journeys and the compilation of reliable timetables. It will make individual transport operations safer and more efficient.

Secondly, ports will be upgraded to intermodal interfaces. RIS will make it easier for port and terminal operators to maximise the use of their capacities.

Thirdly, this directive will finally give us a standardised identification number too, a number plate for inland vessels. Efficient inland navigation makes such a standardised registration number necessary, since it makes vessels identifiable, makes it possible to track consignments and promotes safety. All of these factors will enhance the competitiveness and appeal of inland waterway transport.

What remains to be done? The real challenge lies in the interfaces. Ports, of course, are often focal points of economic development, but many of them are not designed and equipped for trimodal operations. There is a great deal to be done here.

Further improvements are also needed in the links with short sea shipping, a very fast-growing mode of transport. In this case there are administrative obstacles to be removed.

Last but not least, there is the creation and application of the European intermodal loading unit. As you know, we have had the first reading of that draft, and we now await the Council’s common position. I see this as another indispensable step towards the goal of a truly competitive intermodal transport chain.

There is still, however, one fly in the ointment, and that is the relatively non-binding nature of this directive. It is for this reason that we now need to adopt without delay the various technical provisions and standards for the implementation of RIS in order to preclude the emergence of a patchwork of divergent RIS applications, if this has not already happened.

  Hennis-Plasschaert (ALDE), on behalf of the ALDE Group. – First, I would like to thank the rapporteur, Mrs Sommer, who did a great job. There is one issue I would like to raise, which has already been mentioned by Commissioner Barrot.

Over and over again, all European institutions and Member States have publicly declared that they will make every effort to improve the transparency of EU decision-making. That is something we in the European Parliament and, in particular the ALDE Group, fully support. In line with the inter-institutional agreement and a number of other action plans, the Commission decided that all its proposals for directives should contain a specific provision to make it compulsory for Member States to establish tables illustrating the correlation between the act in question and the transposition measures. This should include the communication of these tables to the Commission.

However, during recent informal inter-institutional negotiations with the Dutch and Luxembourg presidencies on proposals for a Directive on River Information Services and a seafarers' certificate, it became clear that the Council is not willing to maintain that provision. As the Commissioner said, the Council's solution is a recital which refers to the agreement on the subject and deletes the obligation imposed on Member States in the text of the Directive itself.

The ALDE Group is very concerned by the Council's approach, as it is not only limited to this Directive. Our Group therefore decided to single out this issue and to request a split vote on Amendment 53. I am aware that not all of you are happy about resolving this political issue with the Council through specific dossiers. However, I think it is time for this House to act. I can only hope that the other Groups make every effort to improve the transparency of EU decision-making and follow our line in this matter.

  Lichtenberger (Verts/ALE), on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – (DE) Mr President, thank you for giving me the floor. Above all, may I add my emphatic and sincere thanks to the rapporteur. The talks were conducted in a pleasant atmosphere, and the majority of the Members who examined this proposal were women, a point that is worth re-emphasising. We dealt with a subject that offers scope for further development, a process that is far from completed. We shall have to ensure that the agreed measures are actually implemented, and of course there is that fly in the ointment to which the previous speaker referred.

There are also two key concerns on which we need to be extremely vigilant here. Firstly, due account must be taken of the need for interoperability, because general acceptance of this new facility and its impact depend to a great extent on its interoperability. If we do not manage to ensure that the interfaces between the various modes of transport actually work, we shall see very little freight haulage being shifted onto our rivers.

The second point is that waterway vessels must be made environmentally safer. Much remains to be done in this respect. Finally, I am grateful that RIS will help to satisfy my concerns regarding the safety of waterway transport operations involving hazardous goods.

  Barrot, Vice-President of the Commission. (FR) I intend to keep my remarks brief, Mr President, but I should like to start by thanking Mrs Sommer and the Committee on Transport and Tourism once again for their outstanding work, which I hope will result in the proposal being adopted at first reading. The Commission should be able to agree to the compromise reached during the informal trialogue held with the Council. We accept the 15 amendments adopted by the Committee on Transport and Tourism that support the Council’s position, and we accept the 34 new amendments Mrs Sommer has tabled that reflect the compromise reached during the informal trialogue with the Council. I hope that the House will be able to lend its support to this approach.

I should also like to pay tribute to Mr Chichester and to thank him, and to tell him that other interested parties cannot sit on comitology committees, as institutional comitology procedures only allow representatives of the Member States to do so. Nevertheless, I agree with his remarks to the effect that the Commission must ensure that industry is duly consulted before proposals are presented. This is necessary if businesses are to be able to perceive RIS technology as a market opportunity, and if they are to be able to offer it at a reasonable and affordable price. Like Mrs Sommer, you stressed that small and medium-sized enterprises must not be saddled with excessive costs as a result of the introduction of RIS. That was the point I wanted to make.

A number of Members have stressed the need for intermodality, and they are entirely right to do so, as this is a key issue. If we wish to increase the use of rivers for transport purposes, we really must succeed in putting intermodality into practice. This will be one of the main thrusts of my work.

I should also like to say that I agree entirely with Mrs Hennis-Plasschaert’s comments on correlation tables, and it is true that we need to act. The whole point of the EU is that the Member States agree to transpose directives, and, on a gradual basis, to account for the way in which they have done so.

That said, I would warn Members against jeopardising this proposal. Mr President, I believe that interinstitutional dialogue will be needed in order to ensure that correlation tables become a ‘good habit’, and something we use for all texts. I would repeat that if this text, which Mrs Sommer very ably improved on behalf of the House and with its help, were not to be adopted without delay at first reading I would be disappointed, especially because I believe there is a real possibility that it could be. Mr President, I should therefore like to thank this House in advance for closely monitoring the implementation of this directive, which I hope will allow us to enhance river navigation in Europe⁽¹⁾.

  President. – The debate is closed.

The vote will take place tomorrow, Wednesday, at 11.30 a.m.

(1) Commission’s position on amendments by Parliament: see Annex.