Excellencies, 

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Dear Friends,

I am very pleased to have the opportunity to address this distinguished forum today as I firmly believe that co-operation along the Danube can be a crucial element in revitalizing economic growth and social development, not only in South Eastern Europe but also among the EU member states involved. 

Looking around this room, I am struck by the incredible potential that exists through the membership of the Danube Co-operation Process to contribute to this revitalization in a variety of concrete and tangible ways.  I would like to use this opportunity to share with you my views on some of these.

My key concern is the role that the Danube should - or could - play as an inland waterway, in the context of the overall Trans European Corridors  (Corridor VII) and from my particular point of view as part of the Core Transport Network as agreed by the countries of the Western Balkans and the EC through the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding on 11 June in Luxembourg.

For the time being this environmental friendly transport mode (compared to road transport) is widely underused. Current data shows an increase in traffic, but the volume is still limping behind the pre- Balkan war figures.  

Let me give you some figures.  In 1987, the cargo volume was nearly 92 million tons. For 1994, no certified figures are available, but cargo volume was estimated at less than 20 million tons. In 2002, the volume of cargo transported reached 34,8 million tones. An increase yes, but to a figure not even half of the pre-war figure.  Figures for passenger traffic mirror the cargo figures although the recovery is somewhat better due to increased tourism on the Danube (mostly eco-tourism and day travel on the Danube).

The decline of the Danube as an inland waterway is certainly partly due to the navigation restriction, which the Danube encountered during the crisis in the Western Balkans, but since then efforts have been undertaken to eliminate these barriers. Navigability is now restored in the Western Balkans – only the pontoon bridge in Novi Sad remains as obstacle, which will be hopefully removed by the end of 2004, although this may slip to May 2005. 

But the decline in the use of the Danube as an inland waterway and particularly as a mode of transport cannot be attributed only to the countries of the Balkans.   Bottlenecks on the Danube in Germany, Austria and Hungary such as Vilshofen / Straubing, Vienna / Bratislava and Palkovicovo / Mohacs also still hinder progress and would require expensive investments to be removed.    

We must not only tackle physical bottleneck but also Institutional “bottlenecks” such as the interdiction of cabotage which are also hindering the development of the Danube.  I sense a reluctance to move forward on this topic that I find strange given the EU’s commitment to free trade, including in-services, and its significant encouragement to South Eastern Europe to liberalise and facilitate its trade both within the region and with the EU.  I think that a clear signal from this meeting that progress should be made on this topic would be a valuable output.

While institutional issues are being addressed, I think we should also try to ensure progress on specific projects in parallel.   New technology can provide valuable means to make substantial improvements to the Danube’s potential as in inland waterway and I think we should find ways to allow us consider proposals from experts and other interested parties on particular projects. Let me mention among others 

Ø       The catamaran technology,  

Ø       New jet propulsion technology 

Ø       Modernization of fleets, * 

Ø       New loading techniques,**  

Ø       New information systems (RIS – river information system), 

Ø       New container loading units for Inland Water Transport (IWT), 

Ø       And new ideas such as the project “DONAU- HAUPTSTRASSE EUROPAS” initiated by the Chamber of Commerce of the City of ULM 

The involvement of institutions such as the Freight Workers Association organisation, Chambers of Commerce along the Danube and tributary rivers like the Sava or Tisza would add value and improve local and regional ownership of the issues. 

I would like also to take this opportunity to emphasise the importance of the environmental dimension, in particular its water management component. Any step for further development of the Danube which would disregard the environmental impact would be a step backwards.

Why am I so keen on this topic of inland waterway transport? An easy answer is that transport by inland waterway is nearly twice as cheap as transport by road (in Germany 1 to 2 cent per ton by boat compared 3.7 cent per ton by truck). This difference will probably grow even larger with the introduction of the toll systems for trucks on German and other European motorways for example.  

______________________________________________________________ 

*….. e.g. following innovations proposed by SOMAT 

**…..e.g. new loading techniques implemented by Väth KG 

So why do the latest figures show that current and future investment in transport infrastructure will be mainly dedicated to road and rail? I am really concerned that no significant future projects on inland waterway transport have been brought forward by the countries concerned.    

Ladies and Gentlemen, we have to do something.    We must push for the so-called tri-modality of transport. I believe that a combination of road, rail and inland waterway transport can make an enormous but cost efficient and environmentally sustainable contribution to economic regeneration and development throughout all the DCP countries.   The Danube’s potential as an inland waterway is vast and totally under exploited at present – unlike road transport.  

I would be happy to pledge my full support and that of my office for any activities that will move this topic forward in a pro-active and tangible fashion. In particular, I am ready to co-operate with the Ministries of Transport of the Danube Basin countries and with the Corridor VII Steering Committee to promote such activities. My hope is that we can set up a clear agenda with a time framework for the next steps, following what is proposed in the Indicative Work Programme 2004 – 2006.

On the other hand, if such activities would not find sufficient support to lead to concrete results and, more generally if we were not able to give sufficient substance to the DCP, it would be difficult for the Stability Pact to continue to provide its support.

However, as I stated earlier, the Danube Co-operation Process has a very significant potential – let us work together to ensure that it delivers!

Thank You