While the construction of the Toulouse-Castres motorway was confirmed by Prime Minister Jean Castex with the designation of the NGE group as the prospective concessionaire, the opponents – including France Nature Environnement – denounce “the great vagueness of the choice of the State “.
On September 25, Prime Minister Jean Castex was in Lagarrigue to announce the choice of NGE as a future concessionaire for the construction and operation of the Castres – Toulouse toll motorway. For some associations, the pill does not work. “During this announcement, no information was provided on the amount of the balancing subsidy requested by the NGE company, nor the amount of the toll that it plans to apply,” denounces the France Nature Environnement association ( FNE).
“These sizing elements should be negotiated during the call for tenders in order to choose precisely the best of the offers from the NGE, VINCI or EIFFAGE candidates. Obviously this is not the case, which is absurd since these are the main ones. selection criteria to be applied by the State “, explains Frédéric Manon, administrator of FNE Midi Pyrénées. And to add that Jean Castex” quickly has the subject of the amount of the toll “.
France Nature Environnement wonders: “In the end, wouldn’t the choice of NGE be a choice by default, the other candidates having withdrawn because the financial balance of this project is not possible? The State and NGE should they agree to push beyond the presidential elections the question of the toll and the balancing subsidy and leave to the future government the cumbersome management of this calamitous file? “
Remember that for the moment, NGE has been designated by the State as the sole prospective concessionaire. That is, the concession contract is still not signed. The objective for the BTP group is to finalize the project with a view to signing the concession contract in the first half of 2022 and starting work in 2023.
As for the association PACT (Pas d’Autoroute Toulouse Castres), the announcements of the Prime Minister “do not therefore resolve our legitimate questions as to the public utility and the need for such an infrastructure unjustified by its traffic and its cost. . ” For these opponents, “lighter and better targeted developments can contribute to savings in time, comfort and safety identical to those targeted by the project. That the State and the communities therefore launch studies on the improvement and securing the existing axis by devoting funds to a public service for land use planning benefiting all users, not only those with high purchasing power “.
Suffice to say that the implementation of the project continues to be debated and will be followed with attention by the greatest number.