The European Commission’s approval of the Hungarian Transport Operational Program contradicts the EU acquis

Clean Air Action Group, Budapest, 8 October 2007 - The European Commission is in the process of approving EU aid to the new member states for the years 2007-2013. In the case of Hungary a large part of the planned aid (which will be used mainly for the development of human resources) will be very beneficial for the society, and hopefully it will be spent efficiently. However a substantial part of the aid is planned to be used for highly questionable purposes.

A considerable part of the aid would be spent on the construction of new roads. This is not only a question of which of these roads would be really necessary for the society. (Although it is already clear that some of the planned new roads will serve mainly urban sprawl and real estate speculation, with all their detrimental consequences.) The main issue here is that road transport users do not pay the full costs of their activity even today. For example, in Hungary each year heavy trucks cause costs amounting to several billion Euros which are not paid by the operators of these vehicles, but by the whole society. Another example is the illegal accounting of private use of cars as company use which results in a loss of revenues for the Hungarian state budget equalling to about 3 per cent of the GDP. All these costs should be internalised into the prices in accordance with the polluter pays principle (Treaty establishing the European Community, Article 174) and with the principles of market economy (Treaty establishing the European Community, Articles 3 and 4). The construction of new roads should be also financed in this way instead of putting more burden on the EU taxpayers.
The Strategic Environmental Assessment of the Transport Operational Program of Hungary came to the conclusion that this Program, if implemented, will promote environmentally unsustainable activities. Therefore further EU financial aid for this purpose would violate the EU legislation which allows EU aid only for environmentally sustainable projects.
At the same time less than one per cent of the total aid would be spent on energy efficiency, although this is one of the most acute problems. For example, in Hungary three times more energy is used to heat one cubic meter in buildings than in the neighbouring Austria. Public transport and railway would also receive much less aid than would be expedient (and moreover, a large part of this aid would be spent very inefficiently – for a 7-kilometer long metro line).
If the presently planned structure of the EU aid would remain, it will enhance processes in Hungary which are unsustainable socially, economically as well as environmentally. The situation is similar in other new member states in Central and Eastern Europe. Environmental NGOs have already warned the European Commission and national governments about these problems, however without real results. They know that the European Commission has tried on many occasions to refuse those demands of national governments which consider only the short term interests of certain business circles and which are unsustainably on the long term. However it seems that now the Commission is ceding too much to the pressure of national governments, even if these demands violate the basic principles and even the legislation of the European Union concerning market economy, environment and sustainability. 
In spite of the above mentioned arguments and protests of NGOs, the European Commission approved the Hungarian Transport Operational Program. After this, the Clean Air Action Group filed a complaint to the Committee on Petitions of the European Parliament. 
Petition of the Clean Air Action Group (CAAG) to the European Parliament (06.10.2007):

Annexes to the Petition:

  1. Reply of DG TREN to CAAG concerning CAAG’s opinion of the Hungarian Transport Operational Program:
  2. CAAG’s complaint to the European Commission (03.01.2007):
  3. CAAG’s letter to DG TREN and DG REGIO (02.02.2007):
  4. CAAG’s letter to DG TREN and DG REGIO (19.02.2007):
  5. Reply from DG TREN to CAAG (20.02.2007):
  6. CAAG’s letter to DG TREN (05.06.2007):
  7.  Reply from DG TREN to CAAG (06.07.2007):
  8. CAAG’s letter to DG Environment (25.09.2007):
  9. The European Commission’s Decision B(2007) 3794 of 01.08.2007 on the Hungarian Transport Operational Program (in Hungarian):
  10. Letter from DG Environment to CAAG (10.10.2007):

Other related materials: