Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-01-31-Speech-3-151"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010131.7.3-151"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen – who I see are rather thin on the ground – following tough, but fair, negotiations between the French Council Presidency and representatives of the European Parliament, we, Parliament that is, managed, on the evening of 22 November, to make clear progress in the Conciliation Procedure on the three fundamental directives on railway liberalisation – namely those concerning the further development of the railways, the licensing of railway undertakings and the allocation of railway infrastructure capacity – such progress being towards the further opening-up of the railway sector.
If, however, the traditional railways do not exploit the new opportunities presented by liberalisation, then many industrial enterprises will consider doing business directly with small railway companies, using European law. They will be entitled to do so. There are 180 licensed railway companies in Germany, and they are licensed to operate wherever they wish, even if they have only operated on a regional basis hitherto. I therefore believe we should prevail upon all parties concerned, the railway companies and industry, to take the necessary precautionary measures without delay, and make use of the competition, so that more freight can be transferred from road to rail.
I will summarise the progress made in three points, and I would like to welcome you Madam Vice-President. We were able to get the Council’s agreement on three points.
Firstly, it was agreed that all railway undertakings should definitively be granted rights of access to the entire rail networks of all Member States for international freight transport, by 2008 at the latest. In so doing, we ensured that from this point onwards, all Member States will be obliged not just to open the marked-out routes of the so-called new trans-European rail freight network, but also their network in its entirety, to the railway companies from the other EU States.
Secondly, the exemption clause – originally planned by Austria – which would have enabled Member States to evade the strict European requirements emanating from the respective national regulation authority, has been dropped. As I see it, this means that across the EU, the national railway companies or their associated agencies will be the last ones to be entrusted with the licensing of railway undertakings, the allocation of railway infrastructure capacity, or railway infrastructure charging, rather this will fall to agencies of a truly independent nature. So these are the two crucial components: the opening-up of all networks for cross-border traffic and the establishment of an independent regulatory authority in all Member States, so as to guarantee fair competition.
Permit me just to say a few words about Mr Swoboda’s report. The third crucial component to be achieved in my view, is that we managed, by means of a new provision, to make a start on the long-term goal of applying the ‘user pays principle’ when it comes to the cost of railway infrastructure usage. In this way, we have ensured that infrastructure charges can be raised in the long term with a view to cost-effectiveness, so that the construction, maintenance and also development is funded by the user, and not by the tax payer at the end of the day. In other words, as I see it, we will still need, in the long run, to implement the separation of rail service operations from those of infrastructure management. But in any event, we need the network to be maintained by the users. That is why we must make it our long-term goal to cover costs through charges.
As I see it, in taking these three essential steps, we are already breaking down the national, fixed railway structures and creating new possibilities for competition between the railway undertakings. Parliament has fought for this, in conjunction with the Commission. The Commission was not exactly enthusiastic to begin with, but it fought alongside us in the end, in a bid to achieve this liberalisation, and I would therefore like to say a special thank you to the Vice-President for her cooperation in the Conciliation Procedure.
I believe that as a result, Parliament, together with the Council and the Commission, has established the framework for an attractive railway sector, which will offer a wider range of customer-orientated, cross-border freight services in the future. After all, what we want is to modernise the railway sector by means of competition, so that, ultimately, more freight is transferred from road to rail. This is because it is absolutely vital, on environmental protection grounds, to get freight off the roads and onto the railways over long distances.
Incidentally, the course taken by the Conciliation Procedure has again borne out the importance of the codecision procedure, and we have only had codecision rights in the transport sector since the Treaty of Amsterdam. Without the codecision procedure we would not have managed to break down the Council’s position. If you recall, the French President-in-Office of the Council had believed that following the first reading of the Council’s common position, all negotiations would come to an end, and we would have to accept the situation. But no, a fair Conciliation Procedure enabled us to make progress and achieve a single market, at least for cross-border freight traffic, with effect from the year 2008 at the latest.
Permit me just to look ahead for a moment. It is simply not enough to only ever produce laws, directives and regulations, nor is it enough just to have them transposed into national law. My group calls upon the existing railway undertakings – and I see one is represented up on the platform, for which I am grateful – to take the necessary precautions now, so that they are in a position to make use of the new provisions when the European law that we are now in the process of adopting has to be transposed in the year 2003. Thus, for example, the
perhaps in conjunction with the Dutch national railways or other railways, should truly exploit the opportunity to make cross-border freight traffic a reality. I believe this is where the traditional railways must really rise to the challenge of pushing through the opening-up of the market that we have created."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"Deutsche Bundesbahn"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples