Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-01-14-Speech-2-020"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030114.1.2-020"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"I am not very impressed by this second rail package given that I strongly support the public services. I voted against the first rail package also. Its effects have yet to make themselves felt in practice. It has not even been fully implemented. Nevertheless, we have already been presented with a second package, which is just as bad as the last previous one.
The aim of the Jarzembowski report is to speed up the development of competition. It attempts to apply road transport standards to rail transport with disastrous consequences. It is actually stated clearly that opening up the rail freight transport market will lead to increased competition which is likely to entail job losses. In short, this report means more liberalisation for fewer jobs. As for the report on safety, its main aim is liberalisation; safety is just an excuse. It is evident that the justification sections often use the safety argument to protect the internal market and exclude new players. The market and safety issues are however clearly incompatible.
I will vote in favour of the next two reports, even though the funds allocated to achieving interoperability are meagre and insufficient, and even though the Agency will remain confined within the framework, in which it was established, namely liberalisation. We would do well to remember the long list of environmental and human disasters that ensued from the complete liberalisation of the maritime transport sector. The liberalisation of sectors that are currently regulated will spell profits for some, but for the rest it will mean accidents, poor working conditions, redundancy and for the passengers, a lower standard of service. Sadly, we have already seen many examples of this, from the collapse of Sabena and that of Air Lib, to the state of the railways in Britain
I remain a strong advocate for the provision of a high-quality European public service. I am for cooperation between different rail networks. I fully support the process of harmonising working conditions, safety standards, salaries and social rights. I believe that the people and those employed in the public services should be in control. In short, I am opposed to this second rail package."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples