The European integration process has so far, on balance, been successful. The Unions member states have experienced peace since the process was initiated and they have seen a continuous growth in earnings and wealth. The single currency is expected to trigger off further economic devel-opment and more close links between the European societies. However, European integration is an ongoing process. It would be a great mistake to draw borders and stop this process in its current limits. Only the total European space can be the limit as history, economy and the societies ask for further extension of the Unions principles and rules to a number of countries ready for accession.

In 1993 the Copenhagen European Council made the historic declaration - at the highest level that "the countries in Central and Eastern Europe that so desire shall become members of the Union. Ac-cession will take place as soon as a country is able to assume the obligations of membership by satisfying the economic and political conditions".

Among the so-called Copenhagen criteria, which must be fulfilled for EU membership, we can read:

• the existence of a functioning market economy as well as the capacity to cope with competi-tive pressure and market forces within the European Union (economic criteria)
  
• the ability to take on the obligations of membership including adherence to the aims of politi-cal, economic and monetary union (acquis communautaire criteria)
  

Up to now, there are thirteen countries that have achieved status of candidate country for accession. All these states follow the Unions tracking, as it was generally described in the Luxembourg (1997) and Helsinki (1999) European Council decisions. The whole process is determined by two main strategic aims: to project political stability and to strengthen Europe as an economic power.

The benefits of enlargement are already visible. Stable democracies have emerged in Central and Eastern Europe while new economic and social structures provide the proper framework for advanced development. The analysis of progress in individual countries shows that reforms pay off. The present round of enlargement brings in countries that wish to contribute full-heartedly to the European project and will help shape the institutions and governance of the future Europe.

Transport is an undeniably important factor in European economic development, with a critical strate-gic role in the integration process. European goods and people are more mobile than ever before and transport policy has emerged as one of the few dynamic policy areas in post-Maastricht 1990s Europe with origins dating back to the Treaty of Rome itself.

A goal of transport policy is to ensure sustainable mobility for people and goods and create a coher-ent global transport system which gives the best possible returns. Seeking an appropriate transport system which could serve its needs, the European Union worked on the establishment of objectives such as the smooth functioning of the internal market and the strengthening of economic and social cohesion.

The result of this process was the decision No 1692/96/EC of the European Parliament and the Coun-cil on the Community guidelines for the development of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN). The real significance of these guidelines lies in the fact that they are the first attempt to de-scribe a vision of how an integrated network in the Union's territory should develop by the year 2010. These guidelines were meant to be neither rigid nor eternal and will be revised in the light of new transport data, traffic forecasts and changing economic, political and financial circumstances. Further to the above decision for the Union's territory, Agenda 2000 highlights the urgent need for the devel-opment and up-grading of transport infrastructure in candidate countries as well as the need to tackle missing links between the accession countries and the existing Union. For the countries concerned, improvements in transport infrastructure are seen as an essential part of their economic development strategies and thus their capacity to cope with the competitive pressures and market forces in the future Union. The Transport Infrastructure Needs Assessment (TINA) best described the needs in trans-port infrastructure in the candidate countries by the year 2015.

In the new pan-European environment (where no political borders interrupt the traffic), the countries of Central and Eastern Europe (CEECs) incorporate the most significant transport routes for the East-West and North-South connections. The central position of these countries, between the Western European countries and the Commonwealth of Independent States and between Scandinavian and Balkan countries, generates the necessity of creating an effective network of transport infrastructure and transport services, adapted to EU standards. The aim of these countries to increase the links with the EU also pushes for the creation of this dual network, infrastructure plus services. In this context, the existing serious problems regarding the legislative-institutional framework established on the net-work should be reviewed.

On the basis of the results of the Pan-European Transport Conferences of Crete in 1994 and of Hel-sinki in 1997, the concept of the Pan-European Transport Corridors and Transport Areas has been generally accepted as an emerging priority regarding transport infrastructure development all over Europe. The development of the Corridors should be seen as a means of achieving the goals of the Common Transport Policy. These transport Corridors of transnational character play a very important role in the European integration of transport and economy. Ten multi-modal transport Corridors have been established in Europe; Corridor VII, based on the Danube waterway, is a one-mode Corridor established during the second Pan-European Transport conference of Crete (March 1994).

The Danube is the second longest river in Europe and one of the principal transportation arteries on the continent. It is the only major European river to flow from west to east. Since early history the Da-nube has been a great water highway and it has always served as a channel of local trade among the nations along its banks. The right to enjoy free commerce on the river is vital to the economy of every country in the Danube Valley. Europe recognized this in the Treaty of Paris in 1856 which declared that Danube navigation would be free to all nations. After World War II the Allies agreed to internation-alise the river but the nations of south-eastern Europe gained control over that section which flows eastward from Austria into Hungary and beyond. Recently, during the well-known events in F.R. Yugoslavia, the bridges at Novi Sad just north of Belgrade were destroyed by bombs; this and other damage, to chemical and oil installations, has caused serious problems to the traffic flow along the river.

The Danube crosses Germany, Austria, Slovakia, Hungary, Croatia, FR Yugoslavia, Romania, Bul-garia, Moldova and Ukraine; however, the influence of its waterway extends to various other countries like the Netherlands, the Czech Republic, Slovenia, and others. The importance of the Danube is based not only on the fact that it is a main inland waterway route but also on the function of its inland ports which is not limited to inland shipping. Apart from the seaport Costanta lying at the mouth of the Danube Black Sea-Canal, there are 44 main inland ports situated along the Danube. The interlinkage of the major water axis with other rail/road Corridors is very important to ensure the inter-modal interconnection of the total network. Most of the ports along the Danube have rail connections as well as road connections, thus making them an attractive mode for combined transport. The necessary infra-structure along the waterway and in the ports deserves special attention. In general, reduction in traffic levels on inland waterways in the CEECs has influenced the transport policies in the region and as a result the investments on inland waterway infrastructures and equipment were dramatically reduced. The whole sector requires urgent reorganisation and reequipping.

Table 1: Comparative data, showing investment figures for inland waterways infrastructure. All prices in Mil. EUROs (1995)

TINA Final Report, November 1999

The data show that between 1987 and 1995 the investments were seriously reduced. However, the candidate countries reported the urgent need for transport infrastructure along Corridor VII and presented a very ambitious investment programme for the period 1998 – 2015. But the continuation from 1999 till now does not seem so promising. ISPA investments (Instrument for the Structural Policy Pre-Accession) undertaken by the CEECs in 2000 contrast sharply with their intentions, as reported in TINA: The countries did not apply for any investment on Corridor VII in 2000. The reason for that might be the difficulties that the transport along the Danube was facing in recent years. Another possibility is that the countries have changed their opinion as expressed in TINA and now believe that the transport infrastructure on the Danube is adequate. However, the most possible reason is that the countries concentrate on other modes, particularly on road transport. It is evident that road transport is a very efficient way to move people and goods. It is cheap, reliable, well-organized, and offers the unique advantage of door to door transport. Railways can also provide valuable services in terms of transport.

Although there seem to be many problems regarding the river, the free and efficient navigation of the Danube is currently rather a political issue than a technical one. The efforts therefore should focus on a political decision to re-establish all the necessary conditions for free and efficient navigation on the Danube after which technical solutions can be implemented.

Decisions about transportation investments are made by "decision-makers". Who are these individuals whose decisions influence transportation investments and their results? These entities include de-partments of transportation at various levels of governance (local, regional, state or national), planning agencies, public authorities (rail, highways, ports), legislative bodies, labour unions, environmental groups, private entities (developers, bankers, business groups), and other categories of users. Each of these stakeholders can, and often do, set their own agendas and priorities. Therefore, a coordinated and harmonious policy aiming at maximizing the economic growth benefits from a particular transpor-tation investment may be difficult to attain.

Following the European planning of the development of the Corridors, the Steering Committee of Cor-ridor VII has considerable tasks to fulfill, particularly as to transport policy questions. Our agenda in-cludes an effort at synchronization and co-ordination in a wide spectrum of tasks, like technical and operational co-operation in the fields of infrastructure and exploitation. Questions regarding the devel-opment of inland ports and the better efficiency of fleet management also belong to the sphere of our interests.

We started our preparatory work two years ago and we are now ready to finish the first objective of our assignment which is the signing of the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) for the Corridor de-velopment. In fact, the text of the MoU was agreed upon two years ago among all participants but the 1999 events in the Balkans froze our works till a real democracy rose in F.R. Yugoslavia. We now intend to organise a Ministerial Meeting to sign the MoU in Vienna, in autumn 2001.

To achieve our objectives, the Steering Committee takes into consideration the

• action already undertaken on the Corridor by the participants concerned, by projects and by international institutions (UN/ECE, EC, ECMT, the Danube Commission, the International Commission for the Protection of the River Danube, the Working Community of the Danube Regions),
  
• texts of the Declaration for the Danube by the European Council, the Danube Protection Treaty, the Belgrade Convention on the Regime for Danube Navigation, the AGN Agreement and other relevant documents.
  

Our main considerations are:

• the integration of the Corridor in the whole Pan-European transport system, and the strength-ening of its connections with the Trans-European Transport Network, and its linkages to the Black Sea PETrA (Pan-European Transport Areas),
  
• the developments emerging from the Transport Infrastructure Needs Assessment (TINA) in the candidate countries and the developments in the countries through which the Corridor passes.
  

In this context, the main tasks of our future work, as described in the MoU, are:

• to co-operate in the development of main and ancillary infrastructures regarding Corridor VII and the relevant ports (this includes maintenance, reconstruction, rehabilitation, upgrading and new construction of main and ancillary infrastructures),
  
• to work for the development of the operation and use of the Corridor with a view to fostering the most efficient and environmentally friendly use of it,
  
• to work for more efficient fleet operation on the Danube,
  
• to work towards shifting cargo to inland navigation in the context of developing transport ser-vices on a multi-modal basis,
  
• to co-operate for the most efficient use of funds and know-how provided by public and private sources.
  
  

In this context, the participants are prepared to agree upon a common set of technical standards nec-essary to secure interoperability between all sections of the Corridor and between various transport modes.

Since excessive waiting times at border crossings may impede any improvements resulting from the development of the Corridor, the participants wish to stimulate and promote the facilitation of common procedures for border and customs controls, shorter waiting times and a better efficiency of the freight and passenger traffic along the Corridor (including the trans-shipment in the context of combined transport).

Finally, the participants jointly aim to ensure the development of the legal and financial conditions necessary for private sector participation in the development and operation of the Corridor.

To cover all the items of the MoU and to be more effective, the Steering Committee has established three Working Parties that will work in its framework:

• A Working Party for Infrastructure, chaired by Austria
  
• A Working Party for Operations, chaired by Romania
  
• A Working Party for the Fleet, chaired by Hungary
  

The MoU is a text of intentions and does not bear particular legal obligations. However, its political significance is remarkable as it is a clear indication expressing the willingness of the countries and of the European Union (the EU is also a signatory) to synchronize their efforts to achieve commonly ac-cepted objectives.

The extension of our objectives and our framework towards larger areas, making use of the total dense network of the European rivers and canals that link very important cities and ports in the Black Sea and the Atlantic, will be one of our first future tasks once we are making good progress in the current area of Corridor VII, as defined in the Pan-European Conferences of Crete and Helsinki.

In my presentation, the importance of multi-modal transport and the role of the Danube in the devel-opment of multi-modal transport has been emphasized several times. Inland waterway transport is, in essence, a multi-modal form and is therefore dependent on a development strategy which presup-poses both the removal of various barriers and the coherent development of the entire system. In this context, the Chairs of Corridor VII, Railway Corridor IV and Railway Corridor X have commonly de-cided to establish a common Secretariat in Vienna at the former TINA premises to work together to-wards the multi-modal development of transport in Central and South-Eastern Europe. We believe that there are many positive synergy effects and many things that can be achieved if the inland waterways combine their potential with the railway; the inland ports along the Danube can be the gates of ex-tended regions to move people and goods westward, northward or southward, using the most efficient, capacity-free and environmentally friendly means like railways and inland waterways.

Ladies and Gentlemen, European integration is mainly a political process, but the economics of this integration process are also important. The political objectives can only be met if economic integration is successful and placed on a sound economic footing. Transport has a particular role to play both economically and socially. In this context, the extension of the Trans-European Network towards the TINA Network and the Pan-European Corridors is a technical and political process conceived to assist the various European States to work together and synchronize their technical plans and standards as well as their legislative and institutional statutes. The integration process has been marked by ups and downs; however, long ago European integration reached the point of no return.

The Pan-European Corridor VII - the Danube - is already progressing, with its efforts organized by a Steering Committee in which the European Commission and all the countries crossed by the Danube work together. Success will not come automatically. It will require the dedication and the will of many people and institutions in many areas. If successful, these efforts will surely be amply rewarded.