Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-09-27-Speech-2-320"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050927.22.2-320"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I should like to thank Mr Jarzembowski, the rapporteur, very much for his detailed report on the liberalisation of national railways. The report is particularly important for the new Member States.
As a Polish Member of the House, I should briefly like to share two reactions with you. To start with, I would remind the House that the first two railway packages have not yet been fully implemented in certain Member States. In addition, there has been no detailed assessment of these packages. All this significantly hinders discussion on the Third Railway Package.
Secondly, as regards the Third Railway Package, I am convinced that it is largely based on the experiences of the old Member States, and that it does not take account of the situation in the new countries. In particular, I have in mind Mr Jarzembowski’s report, in which the date for liberalisation of passenger transport services is set at 2008, two years earlier than had been advocated in the Commission’s proposal. In addition, in Mr Jarzembowski’s report the scope of liberalisation is broadened to include cabotage. Anyone who is acquainted with the current situation of passenger transport in the new Member States will realise that such measures would be very detrimental. It should be borne in mind that the new Member States are far less competitive that the old ones, and that in general they lack modern rolling stock and suffer from under-investment in rail infrastructure and from under-funding of regional transport services. Consequently, broadening the scope of liberalisation and speeding it up is bound to destabilise the already perilous position of the new Member States, particularly as the Commission has failed to provide adequate funding from Union resources for the purchase of new rolling stock for passenger transport. Railway undertakings in the new Member States are not in a position to disburse such large sums themselves.
It follows from what I have just said that it is likely that the strong will end up dominating the weak, and I do not believe that the Union should be built on such a basis. Ladies and gentlemen, the Union is not about domination. Indeed, the opposite is the case, the Union is all about acting together in solidarity for the benefit of a single strong Europe whose Member States are not categorised in terms of their strength or weakness."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples