<s>[INST] The next text is a question of a member of the European parliament:"Despite an investment of EUR40million in EU subsidies by the regional government of Andalusia in Andalusia’s first tramway, it will cease to operate on 4June2012. The line is just 3.5kilometres long and runs between Vélez-Málaga and Torre del Mar. It was promoted by the former socialist mayor and inaugurated in October2006. It now has a deficit of EUR2million. Forecasts of user numbers were overly optimistic: 1.2million passengers annually. That figure was never realised and in fact numbers have fallen each year. In 2011, the worst year to date, there were just 676000 passengers. Due mainly to its novelty value, 922135 people used the railway in 2007, the first full year of operation. The numbers in subsequent years were 782126 in 2008, 701599 in 2009 and 701064 in 2010.  As a result of poor passenger numbers, the City Council of Vélez-Málaga, which is responsible for its maintenance, has decided to suspend the service between the two towns. ‘I am not against the tramway, but it is not economically sustainable,’ stated the city’s mayor, a member of the Partido Popular party. ‘It was badly conceived from the start,’ argued the Councillor for Transport. ‘A minimum population of 300000 would be needed to avoid a deficit; we have 80000 inhabitants and only 60000 of those live in the area served by the tram,’ said the councillor, who acknowledges that for the line to be successful a 3% annual increase in numbers would be needed to balance costs(1).  MrKallas’ answer to Question E‑003896/2012 should also to be taken into account: ‘Given the current state of public finances in Spain, it is critically important to carry out a fully transparent cost-benefit analysis for any new infrastructure project. An issue for Spain is to concentrate infrastructure investment on projects providing a substantial added value such as the completion of the key corridors to be closely and more efficiently linked to the internal market, or the interconnection of key poles taking into account the high opportunity cost of public funds.’  Is the Commission aware of this project? What kind of cost-benefit analysis took place before EU funds were committed to a tramline whose profitability was so dubious?  Does the Commission believe that this expenditure is in keeping with the transport priorities it set out in the review of TEN‑T?    (1)http://www.elconfidencial.com/espana/2012/05/29/el-primer-tranvia-andaluz-a-dique-seco-tras-40-millones-en-subvenciones-europeas-98894"
Analyze carefully the text and assign it to the most relevant policy area among those listed below. Do not explain your answer and return only a number.
Policy area numbers: 1 = Macroeconomics
2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties
3 = Health
4 = Agriculture and Fisheries
5 = Labour, employment and pensions
6 = Education
7 = Environment
8 = Energy
9 = Immigration
10 = Transportation
12 = Law and Crime
13 = Social welfare
14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning
15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues
16 = Defence
17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues
18 = Foreign trade
19 = International affairs and foreign aid
20 = Governance and government
21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues
23 = Culture and media
[/INST]. Answer = [10]. </s>
Despite an investment of EUR40million in EU subsidies by the regional government of Andalusia in Andalusia’s first tramway, it will cease to operate on 4June2012. The line is just 3.5kilometres long and runs between Vélez-Málaga and Torre del Mar. It was promoted by the former socialist mayor and inaugurated in October2006. It now has a deficit of EUR2million. Forecasts of user numbers were overly optimistic: 1.2million passengers annually. That figure was never realised and in fact numbers have fallen each year. In 2011, the worst year to date, there were just 676000 passengers. Due mainly to its novelty value, 922135 people used the railway in 2007, the first full year of operation. The numbers in subsequent years were 782126 in 2008, 701599 in 2009 and 701064 in 2010.  As a result of poor passenger numbers, the City Council of Vélez-Málaga, which is responsible for its maintenance, has decided to suspend the service between the two towns. ‘I am not against the tramway, but it is not economically sustainable,’ stated the city’s mayor, a member of the Partido Popular party. ‘It was badly conceived from the start,’ argued the Councillor for Transport. ‘A minimum population of 300000 would be needed to avoid a deficit; we have 80000 inhabitants and only 60000 of those live in the area served by the tram,’ said the councillor, who acknowledges that for the line to be successful a 3% annual increase in numbers would be needed to balance costs(1).  MrKallas’ answer to Question E‑003896/2012 should also to be taken into account: ‘Given the current state of public finances in Spain, it is critically important to carry out a fully transparent cost-benefit analysis for any new infrastructure project. An issue for Spain is to concentrate infrastructure investment on projects providing a substantial added value such as the completion of the key corridors to be closely and more efficiently linked to the internal market, or the interconnection of key poles taking into account the high opportunity cost of public funds.’  Is the Commission aware of this project? What kind of cost-benefit analysis took place before EU funds were committed to a tramline whose profitability was so dubious?  Does the Commission believe that this expenditure is in keeping with the transport priorities it set out in the review of TEN‑T?    (1)http://www.elconfidencial.com/espana/2012/05/29/el-primer-tranvia-andaluz-a-dique-seco-tras-40-millones-en-subvenciones-europeas-98894