Euro-lorry attacked
Page 6
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
THE EEC's compromise proposals for 40 tonne lorries came under fire at the April session of the European Parliament in Strasbourg when British MEPs joined forces to question Transport Commissioner Georges Kontogeorgis.
The attack was led by the member for Staffordshire East, Robert Moreland. He pointed out that, as one member state — Britain — has already made it clear that the new 40-tonnes over five-axles weight limit was unacceptable, the proposals were unlikely to be adopted by the EEC Transport Ministers.
Would it not, therefore, he asked, be more sensible to look for an alternative solution such as a range of key weights and dimensions or model rules rather than mandatory regulations?
But the Commissioner stood his ground. The 40-tonne limit already represented a concession — and one which the Parliament had already accepted.
Spread over five axles, it represented less of a threat to the environment than the alternative suggestion of 38 tonnes over four axles. Former leader of the British Conservative group, Sir James Scott-Hopkins, insisted that even 38 tonnes was hard for the British Government to accept.
He asked what funds would be made available to compensate the UK for the necessary work on construction of by-passes around villages and the re-inforcement of bridges?
Mr Kontogeorgis answered this question, by insisting that new limits would mean money saved. There would be fewer lorries; less fuel consumed and less wear and tear on roads and bridges.
This answer was "totally unacceptable" to Sir James. He promised to initiate an emergency debate on the problem in the near future.