Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-02-25-Speech-4-067"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20100225.5.4-067"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Mr Kallas, I would like to thank you for your explanations. Against the background of the accident in Buizingen it is, of course, important for us to show respect towards the victims and also towards the investigation. For this reason, we must not jump to conclusions about the accident and, more significantly, we must not begin assigning blame.
I felt that the Commission acted correctly in strongly rejecting the accusation by the Belgian National Railways that the European Rail Traffic Management System has taken too long to develop. We know that safety remains a national priority and that this will continue to be the case. At a European level, we – and this includes both the Commission and Parliament – have always regretted the fact that the rail companies do not give higher priority to safety and to interoperability between the different systems in Europe.
After accidents have occurred, new proposals are often made in a political context. I must say that in this case, everything was in place, both the legislation and the technology. The only thing which perhaps was lacking was the will to make the technology a high priority. Since the middle of the 1990s, the technology has been available to enable the safe transition between the European system and the advanced Belgian system, in other words, the so-called TBL 1+ system. There has been no lack of time or of technical facilities.
The future is what is important to me and I would like to emphasise the following points. Firstly, we must not, under any circumstances, cut back on training in the rail industry. That has not been, nor will it be, one of the EU’s obligations. The railways have highly skilled staff and this must remain the case in future.
Secondly, we need definite, binding conversion plans from the rail companies and the countries. Leaving everything to goodwill is no longer sufficient. We need a precise timetable and we will soon have the opportunity in Parliament to find out about specific objectives.
My third proposal is that passengers should also have the right to know whether the stretch of track and the rolling stock that they travel on meet the highest safety standards. This is the minimum level of information which must be made available to passengers in future. We also need to investigate how we can put in place a mandatory requirement to do this."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples