Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-09-27-Speech-2-311"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050927.22.2-311"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, I am from a country and a region which, as a result of their history and geography, are particularly sensitive to the need to achieve the greatest possible diversification and rebalancing of the different modes of transport, with particular recognition of the railway.
Realities such as the Madrid-Paris Talgo or the high-speed lines, which are extremely popular with the Spanish citizens, are testimony to this enthusiasm for modernising the railways. But we have not forgotten what it has cost us, and is still costing us, to put an end to the isolation resulting from the single track, from our different gauge of track, to overcome our complex and difficult mountain situation and the challenge of creating a central route through the Pyrenees, which is becoming increasingly urgent in order to reduce the congestion at either extreme, and is therefore crucial to goods transport.
Hence our interest in an effective improvement to the railways, which is more global and integrated and not restricted to proposing total and definitive liberalisation as a magic potion for resolving every kind of problem forever.
We know – and the chairman of our committee, Mr Costa, has referred to this authoritatively – that the competitiveness of railways does not just depend on other rebalancing measures, but, to a large extent, on infrastructures, on the interoperability of systems and on specialised personnel; in short, on investments and on support. That is why we are lending our support to the trans-European networks.
Neither do I believe that it is sensible to indulge in a kind of ‘yo-yo’ system: first we liberalise and deregulate and then we intervene once again. And that has happened in the case of the Commission’s proposal for quality standards in goods transport. We must acknowledge the courage and skill of Mr Zīle, who has worked in the best possible way, given the circumstances, which make this proposal a good candidate for the ‘Better regulation’ that President Barroso and Commissioner Verheugen are offering us so secretively.
As shadow rapporteur, I must confess that I was totally astounded to discover that neither customers nor companies wanted this type of legislation. Perhaps, Commissioner, we should – and I believe that you are sufficiently creative to do this – try to invent other instruments that are genuinely useful in terms of making goods transport by rail more attractive, not just for advocates of conflicts, but, in particular, for its users. In short, no, we cannot legislate in relation to goods by rail as we do with other products, as if we were talking about socks.
With regard to the Sterckx and Savary reports, I would like warmly to acknowledge their timeliness and sense of urgency and the excellent message they send to the citizens. On the one hand, we are creating good European professionals, able to drive trains throughout the whole of the Union’s territory and, on the other, we wish to establish, clearly and courageously, the rights and obligations of passengers, with particular attention to passengers with mobility problems, something which will eventually affect all of us.
Finally, with regard to the report by Mr Jarzembowski, who is always so impulsive and sure of his objectives, which all too often coincide with those of Europe, I must say that I do not believe it to be realistic to seek to overwhelm the Commission’s proposal, and also to involve it in an interinstitutional battle which, as a result of seeking the best, could jeopardise any success. We would have preferred to have accompanied the Commission’s realistic and detailed proposal with a healthy majority which sent a clear signal to all of the interlocutors. Instead, he has chosen to present his over-the-top proposal, which has provoked opposition from a significant proportion of this House.
In any event, I still believe that the Commission’s proposal for opening up is the most pragmatic and realistic, provided that it is part of a general framework of creating a European area of transport, in which the railway competes with other modes of transport under equal conditions. And that will be achieved through modernisation and investment."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples