3 key points
The metropolization of France drains its peripheries much more than it irrigates them
The golden rule of logistics : avoid load breaks
Stimulus shouldn’t be a plan that stutters past mistakes
–
David Cormand
MEP, co-chair of the Europe Ecology delegation to the European Parliament
–
“Édouard Philippe and Nicolas Mayer Rossignol, presidents of the metropolitan areas of Le Havre and Rouen, signed an open letter to the Prime Minister, Mr. Jean Castex, to signify their common commitment to“ the ecological transition and the sustainable economic development of the Vallée de the Seine ”.
Here and everywhere on the planet, the ecological transition is indeed a major issue. Who could doubt it?
This letter was the occasion to affirm this ambition.
The opportunity, therefore, at the time of the sad commemoration of the Lubrizol disaster, to demand an industry that respects environmental and safety rules with additional means of control? The opportunity to demand for our Normandy agriculture a reform of the Common Agricultural Policy, currently under negotiation, for our environment, the peasants and our local economy? The opportunity to ensure the protection of our fishermen and the coastal economy they generate at a time when Brexit threatens them more than ever?
Alas … The only thing the two metropolitan leaders wanted to talk about was the “Seine axis” … And not as a river, but as a “canal” that connects their two agglomerations …
However, the traditional and historical activities of Seine-Maritime, of which the Seine valley bears the scars, overwhelm and impact the entire Normandy region, too often at the risk of being imposed to the detriment of other territories and ‘other activites.
This is a well-known reality in our Region where the centrality of the “Seine axis” has set aside many Norman territories such as the coast or rural areas and their towns and town centers.
Here as elsewhere, the metropolitanization of France drains its peripheries much more than it irrigates them. The vision of “the valley of the Seine” by the two Presidents of the metropolis suggested by their letter does not deny this phenomenon.
While the subject of the letter invited to address the ecological question, not a word of biodiversity. However, the Seine Valley is rich in an exceptional natural heritage, but in peril.
In danger because over the decades the State as the local communities have been failing in the control of the development of the industrial and logistics basin, which too often has been achieved to the detriment of the environment.
However, it not only contributes to the quality of life of the inhabitants but also to the attractiveness of our region, including our two agglomerations.
But if we look at the way our ports operate, we see that they are developing in nature reserves instead of improving their hinterland, increasing their activity on existing sites, on wasteland, and transporting their goods mainly by road having almost abandoned the rail.
In this area the results are catastrophic. In its logic of extensive development, the Port of Le Havre has chosen to build its multimodal sea / rail exchange platform near the nature reserve rather than the port, thus forgetting the golden rule of logistics: avoiding charge. Faced with the additional operating costs generated, the first manager of the platform went bankrupt.
This organization thus proving to be faulty, the actors of the logistics turned away from the railroad and carried as evidence the realization of a pseudo motorway bypass of the agglomeration of Rouen. Fortunately, the municipal campaign has made it possible to widen the circle of opponents, from environmentalists to the current President of the Metropolis of Rouen who announced that he would withdraw from the financing of the bypass. It only remains for the Prefect, the contracting authority, to draw all the consequences.
But this progress on the motorway bypass, which is not recalled in the letter, is not enough to mask the deafening silence on biodiversity.
However, during the public debate on the leveling of the channel of the Seine to allow ships of new generations to serve the port of Rouen, a “counterpart” was granted: the completion of this work was to be accompanied by 90 million euros. ‘euros for renaturation work on the banks of the Seine, to restore its hydraulic functions and the classification of the loops of the Seine from Rouen to Le Havre by 2018.
Balance sheet? Nothing. Or so little: only one of the loops of the Seine, that of Roumare, was classified in 2015 …
This total lack of consideration of biodiversity is also found in the plea in favor of the route of the LNPN by Barentin after the crossing of the Seine claimed by the two Presidents, since they do not question it. .
And yet, the alternative exists … We, environmentalists, have proposed since the origin of the project a more sober solution, with a railway bypass at Mantes-la-Jolie and a new station in Rouen left bank, resuming the proposal of the railway unions, with two stations, linked by a reinforced public transport offer, a tram for example.
But the chosen choice is to cross the Seine by favoring the worst scenario, one which destroys 400 ha of agricultural land while preventing a service to Dieppe, all this to gain a few minutes to reach Le Havre.
The “recovery plan” must not be a plan which stutters the errors of the past: competition of territories, predation on nature, contempt for peasant agriculture, concentration of activities and powers in metropolitan areas, heavy and costly infrastructures. ..
We must get out of the logic of always faster, to build a more sober society. Slowing down and measuring our impact on the environment is a matter of responsibility. The ecological ambition of the two Metropolises must, moreover, be imagined with all the Norman territories.
In short, in order to prepare for the times to come, it is not a question of putting ecology off until later. Because ecology “later” is ecology too late. It’s time. It is time to finally put actions in line with words. “
– .
