Brussels – At least since the days of the green deal – which today, however, seems to go back to prehistoric times – sustainable mobility has been at the heart of the European Commission’s priorities. However, building a continental green transport network comes with significant costs, including social costs. Particularly at a historical juncture when EU policy (and others) focuses primarily on the economy and defence.
We spoke about this with Marcin Nowacki, vice-president of the Polish Union of Employers and Entrepreneurs (ZPP) and president of the European Business Alliance (EEA), who chairs the Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and Information Society (TEN) commission at the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC).
The Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T) is “the centrepiece of our ambitions,” Nowacki told Eunews, referring to the new regulation adopted last year by the EU co-legislators, the Council and the European Parliament. The text ‘”sets out a three-stage timetable for the completion of the network,” he explained. “The central network by 2030, the extended central network by 2040, and the global network by 2050.”
Of the three, he notes, the 2040 deadline is “particularly significant because it focuses on closing cross-border gaps,” since “many regions of the EU still lack high-speed lines or face persistent interoperability problems at their borders,” leading to fragmentation along national lines.
How do we overcome these bottlenecks? We are not just talking about “laying the track:” the realisation of “a Europe-wide high-speed rail network,” he reasons, “requires interoperability (e.g. common standards, signalling, electrification), efficient cross-border operations, coordinated investment, and political will.” For Nowacki, the 2025 Plan recently proposed by Brussels to accelerate the construction of a continental rail network “implies an exceptional coordination of funding” and must therefore be implemented with the utmost care to avoid waste of resources.
Speaking of funding, the EESC member admits that “the transition to sustainable mobility requires strong initial investments in infrastructure and technology,” including modernising public transport fleets, building charging stations, and integrating intelligent traffic management systems. Costs are “still higher in suburban and rural areas, where existing infrastructure is limited,” and citizens’ “equitable access” to green opportunities must be ensured.
“Making mobility sustainable means planning for everyone, not just for big cities,” Nowacki reiterates, adding that “local authorities, transport operators, and communities themselves must work together” to achieve shared results. “If we skip this process – which goes through effective mobility plans – we will end up with fragmented solutions,” he warns, “that leave someone behind.”
In short, is decarbonisation a privilege for the few? “Certainly it is an expensive process,” he concedes, and therefore “solutions appropriate to the possibilities at the local, national, and European levels must be sought.” The latter plan, at the community level, is indispensable according to Nowacki: “Without a European perspective, it is difficult to embark on truly ambitious projects,” he notes, due to matters of scale and financial viability.”
“Before building a bridge,” he points out, “we should ask ourselves whether improving rail and sea connections might not be a better and more ecological solution.” In other words, “if the bridge does not add clear value to the wider network or risks taking funds away from other important projects, then it is difficult to justify it,” he argues. “Connectivity is crucial, but from a European perspective it must serve a broader interest, not just local ambitions,” he concludes.
As for the recent discussions on the so-called “Military Schengen,” Nowacki recognises “the potential for strengthening operational capabilities, promoting interoperability, and aligning with the Union’s broader security strategies.” It is, he says, “a promising step towards strengthening defence cooperation” among the Twenty-Seven member states, recalling that “in times of war, the speed of movement between member states is crucial.”
The twelve-star executive would like to enable the movement of troops, weapons, and vehicles across EU territory to the other in three days. Currently, it would take about 45. The point, Nowacki specifies, is that “the concept of military mobility goes beyond simply moving equipment and is an essential element of Europe’s preparedness and resilience in the face of unforeseen challenges.” That is why he considers the legislative package presented last month by the Berlaymont “an important step forward, because we must remain capable of responding to potential threats.“
English version by the Translation Service of Withub
