At the sitting held on 2 February, the members of the Committee on Transportation and Communications debated the current situation in Belgrade road transportation.

The sitting was attended by the Minister of Infrastructure Milutin Mrkonjic and Director of PE “Roads of Serbia” Zoran Drobnjak.

The Committee debated issues relating to the remedial works and reconstruction of Gazela bridge.

Addressing the Committee members and deputies present, Minister Mrkonjic pointed out that the problem of Gazela bridge was an acute problem and that the ministry, inheriting previous Governments’ contracts, has initiated the project of remedial works. The realisation was difficult due to the relocation of the Roma settlement under the bridge, as stipulated by the contract with the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. He announced that in the next 15 days, the City of Belgrade, the Ministry of Infrastructure and EBRD would come to an agreement in order to draw loan funds and complete the rehabilitation of the bridge. He also added that the bridge would not collapse and that it needed to be repaired as part of its regular maintenance.

In the discussion, the deputies pointed out that the Gazela rehabilitation project envisaged that the City should resolve the issue of relocation of the Roma settlement under the bridge before commencing remedial works. The committee members discussed whether the 33 million EUR loan contract with the bank envisaged the relocation of the Roma settlement with the construction of solid material homes on the territory of Belgrade, or not, as well as how to resolve the situation of jurisdiction, when the remedial works on the bridge would commence, how much they would cost, whether the granted loan was enough for the rehabilitation, whether there was a rehabilitation plan and who was in charge. The discussion also gave voice to the fact the Gazela rehabilitation project was part of a larger 180 million EUR project, and that the funds have been granted three years ago, that the contractual duties have not been fulfilled and that that was the reason that the rehabilitation funds could not be drawn. It was also pointed out that the steel and concrete construction of the bridge needed to be replaced, that regular control noted 45 to 48 cm long cracks in the steel construction, and that, as a remedial measure, heavy freight traffic was banned from the middle lane of the bridge. The bridge was open for traffic 40 years ago and has not been seriously reconstructed to date, and reconstruction means the replacement of about 1 000 tons of construction. The Committee members and the other deputies wanted to know what the City and the Republic’s contractual obligations were and whether, after the rehabilitation, the bridge would be able to withstand unimpeded freight traffic. They also discussed the responsibility of PE Roads of Serbia, whether the enterprise was running a loss, what caused the rise in the reconstruction price, how the discrepancy between the 58 million EUR, the price of the reconstruction, and 33 million EUR of the granted loan, would be financed, whether and how much the state paid in interest on the loan which was granted but not drawn, adding that when granting warranty at the National Assembly the deputies did not have insight into the financial construction and contractual relationship.

Following a long discussion, at the proposal of the deputies of the Liberal-Democratic Party Deputy Group, the Committee on Transportation and Communications adopted the following conclusions, by a majority of votes: 1) PE Roads of Serbia is obligated to forward to the Committee on Transportation and Communications and all competent institutions of the City of Belgrade, via the Ministry of Infrastructure, all relevant information, plans and accounts relating to the volume, conditions, total price, dynamics and deadlines for the reconstruction of Gazela bridge and accompanying works on the project by 15 February 2010 at the latest; 2) PE Roads of Serbia is obligated to forward to the Committee on Transportation and Communications and all competent institutions of the City of Belgrade, via the Ministry of Infrastructure, an accurate accounting and analysis of the increase in reconstruction cost arising from the postponed commencement of works, by 15 February 2010 at the latest; 3) so as to coordinate the preparations for the construction work and avoid problems in the functioning of freight and passenger transportation, it is recommended that a coordinating body be formed comprising representatives of the Ministry of Infrastructure, PE Roads of Serbia and the City of Belgrade and 4) the Committee on Transportation and Communications requests from the Government of the Republic of Serbia that PE Roads of Serbia increase supervision of the conditions and functioning of Gazela bridge and keep the public and competent institutions duly informed.

The sitting was chaired by the Committee Chairman, Velimir Ilic.