the European State Audit Court rejects the modalities with which the EU it finances the ports, investments that turn out ineffective and not sustainable



"The investments in which co-financed harbour infrastructures from the European Union are ineffective and not sustainable, with an elevated risk that about 400 million euros invested goes wasted". It emphasizes the European State Audit Court in own special relation "the marine transport of the EU is in bad waters: many investments turn out ineffective and indefensible" diffused today, in which the European institution finds that, against 6,8 billion euros invested from the EU in the ports between 2000 and 2013, to which financings as loans by the European Investment Bank (BEAUTIFUL) for a amount of about 10,1 billion euros have joined, it has been stated that the placed strategies of harbour development in being from the Member States and the Commission have not supplied sufficient information in order to allow an effective planning of the ability. By this it is achieved that the investments in the ports which co-financed from the EU exactly have turned out not effective and not sustainable.

In particular, the relation evidences that the strategies of harbour development in the long term placed in being from the Member States and the Commission have not constituted a solid and coherent base in order to plan the ability necessary in the ports of the EU and in order to characterize the financings of the EU and the financings for infrastructure harbour necessary national publics.

The document finds moreover that in bordering ports the financing of infrastructures and similar harbour superstructures has had as consequence ineffective and not sustainable investments: on the base of 30 of the 37 projects examined and already completed between 2000 and 2013, an euro on three (correspondent to 194 million euros for 12 projects) up to now is spold without effectiveness. About the half of these financings (97 million euros of financings EU for nine projects) are invested in infrastructures that are not used or strongly are underused for beyond three years counting from the conclusion of the work. This - the Count observes - brings to light deficiencies in the appraisal ex ante of the requirements and denotes an elevated risk of waste of the invested amounts.

Short the detailed list that how much as soon as observed it is true also for the five projects that already were examined in 2010 and that they have been object of a new appraisal that has delineated on the whole an employment of the resources anything but optimal: after almost a decade of activity, I use it of the ability financed from the EU for these ports was still inadequate. In four ports - the relation specifies - the harbour areas were still to a level of use lowest or were empty. Altogether, it has been judged that investment 292 million euros are spold in ineffective way.

Ulterior inefficiencies that are found in the investments in examined harbour infrastructures are constituted by the sforamento of the costs and the delays. On the whole, for the projects financed from the EU examined from the auditor of the Court they had been sforamenti of the costs for 139 million euros. Moreover, 19 of the 30 completed projects have made to record delays, in 12 advanced cases to 20% of the previewed duration of the project. The delays have reached until 136% of the duration initially planned. Also you are of the seven projects not still completed at the moment of the audit (correspondents to a financing EU pairs to 524 million euros) have made to record delays.

The relation emphasizes moreover that many connections between the ports and the outback are inadequate or absent, lacking which for example street and railway connections, and will need of ulterior financings publics in order to assure the correct exploitation of the initial investments in the ports.

Not even the coordination inside of the EU commission neither the operating procedures between BEAUTIFUL and the Commission in order not to estimate the BEAUTIFUL loans proposed from for infrastructure harbour ones has worked adequately, as the BEAUTIFUL ones does not share with the Commission all the relevant information. Moreover, for some proposals of loan, some critical problems are evidenced internal, in the within of the Commission, but they have not been marked to the BEAUTIFUL ones as seeming negative of the EU commission.

Regarding the aids of State and the customs procedures, the specific relation that the EU commission has not undertaken the actions necessary to assure conditions of competitive parity between the ports. According to the European State Audit Court, the control of the Commission on the aids of State it could have been more effective and effective, verifying a posteriori if the conditions to which the decisions were assumed precedence (for example, for the concessions) had remained unchanged, or refusing the support to destined superstructures to specific users. For example - the relation specifies - the comprising projects superstructures used from private operators were co-financed with about 92,5 million euros being worth on the budget of the EU.

In the report the Court formula some recommendations in order to do so as that the financings of the EU in the ports turn out more effective and sustainable. For the European institution "Core" is necessary to establish a monitoring of the ability to the ports, taking into consideration the plans of the Member States for the performance of the strategies in the long term, the Cores" (104) considered must see again the current number of ports "necessary ones to maintain an adequate level of accessibility for the EU in its complex, and are necessary to elaborate a harbour development plan at the level of EU for the ports "Core", the marine ways of navigation and the channels.

According to the Court, moreover, he is indispensable to collaborate with the Member States in order to reduce the administrative burdens and the delays in the selection and the performance of the projects, promuovendo the principle of a "national only door" for the release or the refusal of all the permissions and the authorizations for relative investments to harbour infrastructures. Moreover it would have to be applied as soon as possible the principle of the "tacit consent" (after, for example, two years).

It would have also to apply in rigorous way the regulations bringing common dispositions on the deep SIE, let alone the regulations on the mechanism in order to connect Europe (CEF) to the adjustments financial institutions caused from inefficient investments for period 2014-2020, and to estimate the possibility not to grant to financings EU, during period 2014-2020, to destined harbour infrastructures to the transfer or storage of container (for example, construction of piers, docks and storage capability). Moreover - for the Court - the superstructures that esulano the public mandate would have to be excluded from the financings EU, as they would have to be considered re-entering in a commercial context.

The Court considers also necessary to attribute to the ports "Core" the priority for the co-financings of the EU, for a reason or purpose is of the CEF is of Bottoms SIE, to the aim to improve the connections with the respective outback, and to only finance various harbour infrastructures from the connections with the outback on condition that there is a manifest necessity, that EU is demonstrated to the added value and that the member of private investments is sufficiently important regarding the total investment.

It would have also to do so as that all the necessary information on the loans proposed from the BEAUTIFUL ones are shared between BEAUTIFUL and the Commission, in order to facilitate sturdy appraisals; moreover to clarify internal, and to put into effect systematically, the procedure in order to establish if the critical observations must lead to an opinion negative on a loan proposed from the BEAUTIFUL ones.

The recommendations of the European State Audit Court include invitations to emanate guidelines on the aids of State to the marine ports, to assure a homogenous treatment of the destined harbour superstructures to specific users, to increase the number of documentary investigations on the aids of Been about to the ports and to upgrade follow up of the precedence the decisions in matter of aids of State, so as to guarantee that the present conditions at the moment of the decision remain afterwards also.

At last the Court recommends to the Member States to notify in systematic way to the financial Commission every public support to the ports, in the respect of the norm EU in matter of aids of State, let alone to ask the Member States periodically to supply specific information on the type and the number of customs procedures in the single ports "Core", in order to estimate if there is pairs treatment between ports, and to improve the competitiveness of the marine transport by sea respect to other ways of transport becoming simpler ulteriorly the customs formalities and of transport, in particular going towards a "only interface" to level EU.