Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-01-31-Speech-3-167"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010131.7.3-167"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I should first like to express my satisfaction with the final outcome of the conciliation, along with all or almost all those who have already spoken. It has to be made abundantly clear that this initiative is aimed at saving the rail network, modernising it and adapting it to the new state of affairs. We are hoping that at the dawn of the twenty-first century rail will once again become what it was at the start of the twentieth: a reliable, efficient, fast and – for those times – safe form of transport, stimulating development, and indeed offering guarantees of wealth and territorial balance.
There has been talk of privatisation, because liberalisation is to take place. It has been said that public services will not be guaranteed. We must not confuse the issue, ladies and gentlemen. What we are concerned with today is opening up a trans-European network and a trans-European railway to competition, and ensuring that properly licensed European operators may be either public or private.
Furthermore, nobody is talking about privatisation of any sort. There is no question of privatising the operators and especially not the infrastructure. On the contrary, investment in the infrastructure will be called for. The situation is that in some countries not a single euro has been invested in infrastructure over the last thirty years. Safety provisions will require that conditions be such that safety can be guaranteed. This applies not only to the rolling stock but also to the fixed infrastructure. To reiterate my previous remarks, public service is not, unfortunately, properly assured at present, which is exactly why we are striving to improve it.
A moment ago Mr Ortuondo Larrea said that two other issues had to be dealt with: intermodal transport and balancing other forms of transport with road transport. This very morning I read a press note from one of the employers in the road haulage sector. It complained about the White Paper, regretting that it was too rail-orientated. This kind of thing is always happening. The situation we have to cope with is abundantly clear: a 40% increase in demand for freight transport in the next ten years. Not all of that 40% should go to the roads. It has to be absorbed by forms of transport other than the roads. We must go on assuring growth, quality of life, employment and the welfare of the citizens of the European Union. This can be achieved through specific measures of this nature. It will, of course, have to be complemented by a joint study of the various forms of transport, of competition amongst them, intermodality, interlinking, and interoperation. The end result will be a more efficient system which will benefit our economy and our citizens.
I believe we took a significant step in that direction on 22 November last year. The decisions we are to adopt today aim to improve the quality of the service. Contrary to the views expressed by some honourable Members, I believe that the problem with rail transport nowadays is not whether it should be public or private, although it is generally public. The problem is that it does not work. Let us be clear about this. There would certainly be scope for discussing some of the measures put forward here if we were dealing with a rail network which worked. The trouble is that given the current situation, where a public service is guaranteed by public undertakings with a monopoly in the area of the Member States of the Union, it does not work. It simply does not work in the present situation of compartmentalised and divided national rail networks. What we are seeking to do is in fact to effect a change – I would go so far as to say a revolutionary change – where the railways are concerned.
Ladies and gentlemen, what we have achieved today through this debate and what I hope we will achieve tomorrow – I have no doubt that you will vote for the agreed text – is not simply opening up the network, but setting up something new and different. We are setting up a European rail network which does not yet exist, to replace 15 national juxtaposed networks. It is a revolutionary change, and we need to be aware of what we are seeking to achieve.
Some people have complained that we spent too much time on this, others that we rushed things. I would like to say that we might well all have liked to move forward faster. However, it is fair to say that in the short time – just over a year – since I took over responsibility for this area, determined progress has been made and the whole process has accelerated. Furthermore, the codecision procedure has worked very well. In particular, I would like to thank the whole Parliament for the work undertaken, especially by Mr Imbeni and the rapporteurs, Mr Swoboda and Mr Jarzembowski.
Nevertheless, I should also like to thank the Finnish Presidency for its contribution at the time, and particular thanks are due to the French Presidency. In that case, the French transport minster was a knowledgeable railway enthusiast. It was suggested that this would make it harder for us to achieve our aim. On the contrary, it helped us to reach the point we find ourselves at today.
Concerns have been expressed regarding enlargement. Clearly, this will result in the European rail network we are currently setting up being extended beyond the current borders of the Union as they are redrawn.
The key components are opening up the whole network and separating functions, as Mr Jarzembowski has rightly pointed out. However, there is also the crucial and decisive issue of levies. Many of you, ladies and gentlemen, have raised this issue. The White Paper will cover the matter of non-discriminatory levies for infrastructure. In this regard, the conclusions of the Costa report are to be included in the White Paper, and I am grateful to Parliament for this. I should add that in addition to discussing what has already been achieved and will be completed today and tomorrow, we are going to deal with road transport and the action we need to take for the future. I must reassure Mr Swoboda that the measures he referred to, aimed at achieving fair competition within road transport and between road transport and other types of transport have already been put forward or are about to be.
In addition, this year we intend to present the directive on rail safety some members of Parliament were concerned about. I trust I can rely on your support regarding the adoption of the directive on interoperability. Furthermore, we plan to draw up a communication opening up national freight transport and international passenger transport to the market, as I stated when both of these directives were being processed. The communication should even be ready before the end of the year. However, in addition to this communication we plan to present a new directive, amending 91/440/EEC, to open up access to the national freight network and international passenger transport. Furthermore, there will be an amendment to Directive 96/48/EC concerning the interoperability of the European high-speed railway system.
As I said earlier, we will present a second rail transport package before the end of the year, and I hope it will be processed quickly. Safety is a key factor, as is environmental improvement – both affect the citizens directly. Nonetheless, I should like to share with you some final thoughts on some of the issues that have been raised here."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples