1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204 
EEC transport fund could gc way of CAP. Not a pretty thoughi
Page 28
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
INFRASTRUCTURE is one of those words which gives the European Economic Community a bad name. Laymen, and even professionals choke upon it as they try to pretend they understand exactly what it means. My dictionary defines it as "subordinate parts of an undertaking, especially permanent installations as basis for military etc operations", writes ALAN MILLAR.
The European Commission's Green Paper on transport infrastructure is concerned with less sinister infrastructure, the roads and railways which are needed before transport services can be provided. The Green Paper proposes a central fund which will finance projects in the Community interest, It is aimed at helping member states on the edge of the EEC or finan cing projects which will ease bottlenecks which hinder free trade.
This is very much the baby of Transport Commissioner Richard Burke who is deter mined to make some headway before he steps down from office at the end of the year, but he could hardly be proud of its progress at last week's Council of Transport Ministers meeting in Luxembourg when the paper received only passing reference.
He hopes more will happen when the Ministers meet again at the end of the year.
For Britain, the fund could bring in support for a Channel tunnel and it could be used to upgrade the routes between the West Midlands and the East Anglian ports. The cross Britain road link stands a better chance of being pushed nearer the top of the EEC's priorities as Commissioner Burke wants to use this to help boost trade between mainland Europe and his native Ireland.
But progress with an infrastructure fund promises to be painfully slow, even by tardy EEC standards. The only common fund at present operating in the EEC is the common agricultural policy, and everyone is wary about setting up what could grow into a similarly threatening monster. This point was not lost on the House of Commons Select Committee on Transport when it took evidence earlier this year from interested parties. It was worried that a transport fund might be manipulated by the strong members in much the same way as the CAP helps France and West Germany, and even France is now thought to be having second thoughts about CAP.
But more fundamental than that, few seem to know for sure what is "in the Community interest."' It is a bigger mystery to the Select Committee than the meaning of infrastructure. In its written report (CM J une 21), the Committee says: -We recommend that the Government should, in its further negotiations, pursue the particular problem areas discussed in this report, and especially it should seek clarification of the definition and criteria for assessment of 'Community interest'. The Government should report the results of its negotiations to the House.
Put simply, is "Community interest"' something which helps the Community as a whole, is it something which benefits weaker states, or is it something which makes the wealthy states wealthier?
As far as the Commission is concerned, each submission for infrastructure funds will have to justify itself. Some claims might meet one of the interpretations of the term, others another, but they will not necessarily be rejected (or accepted).
The Select Committee recognises that it could be bad for Britain if the Commission does come up with a precise definition. "It may well be that a pre
cise definition of Community interest is neither practicable nor desirable.
And it has heeded British Rail chairman Sir Peter Parker's warning that "we could let perfection really get in the way of getting on with something practical."
It is, of course, Sir Peter's enthusiasm for a single-track rail tunnel under the English Chan nel which is boosting British interest in Commissioner Bur ke's plan. But the Select Com mittee is wary. "It would be quite wrong for the United Kingdom to endorse the present draft Regulation merely in the hope of obtaining support for a Channel tunnel scheme if the longer-term effects on the United Kingdom were uncertain."
And that is the charitable view about the Channel tunnel.
A Road Haulage Association spokesman told CM that it disagrees with the present
"mousehole" tunnel plans. "It is no use to us at all, and we would prefer more money to be spent on roads like the A45 and M3.
In its evidence to the Select Committee, the RHA pointed to the need for more money to be spent on roads to the ports, and
this has been reflected by thi recent White Paper on Englisl roads policy. RHA wants EE( I money to be used to improvi these links. -This would be t( the advantage not only of th( United Kingdom or even Britist hauliers, but to all trade to anc from the United Kingdom anc the rest of the EEC.
The Freight Transpor Association is a body whicf suspects Britain will have to play the infrastructure game carefully if it is to win. It feeh Britain might lose out as it ha.! fewer E routes than its partners. but it does see scope for money being spent on something big like a fixed Channel link.
But it adds: -It seems to u! that general infrastructure fun. ding on the basis of Community interest could be woolly anc wasteful. The provision of one off grants from EEC funds fop specific large-scale projects, in
dividually justified and budgeted, like a Channel link, would have a better chance of being cost effective."
That is the theory and some of the opinion, but what will happen? Ultimately, there is every chance of there being a common transport fund and even a common transport policy, but it will take a very long time to come to pass. Every country has nagging doubts about some aspect of Commissioner Burke's proposals, and there will be many sessions of the Council of Ministers before anything worth while emerges.
Some in the corridors of European power think Portugal holds the key to possible progress. Its transport network is a sorry, primitive mess with many single-track highways and even unsurfaced roads, and money may be made available to the Lisbon Government as part of its terms of entry to the EEC, now expected in January 1984.
If that happens, a precedent will have been created, and the infrastructure floodgates could be opened. There is nothing like inter-state jealousy to break down the semantics of worrying about the precise meaning of infrastructure or Community interest.