Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-06-16-Speech-3-516"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20100616.33.3-516"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I would like to thank the Parliament again for this very useful engagement on an issue which is actually quite emotional from time to time, because we all want to see an integrated European railway system in our lifetime. Hopefully, we will all live long enough to do so.
In the past, I was engaged in the restructuring of railways in two countries that are now EU Member States. I know how very difficult it is to move forward a system that has long traditions and an enormous amount of vested interests surrounding it, yet I think we all need to persevere because an integrated and highly efficient railway system is absolutely essential for the well-being of Europeans and also for the competitiveness of our region.
We, in the Commission, take your comments very seriously and we will continue to work to move forward on the initiatives that require success in this area. I do not think it is a paper tiger if we judge by the number of infringement procedures.
Why has it taken so long? It has taken so long because there has been a process of engagement with Member States. There was also an enlargement that brought new elements into the system and there has been an attempt by the Commission to make this engagement meaningful – in other words, to send serious questionnaires, to analyse the responses carefully and then to follow up with Member States. So the result has legs, and bites!
Infringement procedures are not an objective in itself. What we are aiming at is a well-functioning railway market able to provide more numerous, safer, consumer-oriented services to our citizens and our undertakings. With this in mind, the recast of the first railway package will be designed to simplify and clarify the existing provisions with a view to facilitating their implementation, but also to modernise them.
I would like to make two points in response to comments and questions put to us. One is on the level of safety. The data is categorical that the level of safety has actually increased since the market was opened but, since we are talking about people’s lives, even if we have one accident it is one too many, so obviously we need to strive to increase this level of safety.
Since, in two comments, a question was posed regarding the imposition of public service obligations, I would like to clarify that the first package is not an obstacle to that. These obligations are regulated under separate legislation and therefore pursuing them is a possibility.
Many Members spoke about strategy and directions. I will share with the Parliament our three main priorities – and they reflect many of the comments that have already been made. Firstly, improving market access conditions and making them more transparent and non-discriminatory, secondly, establishing a regulatory framework, fostering both public and private investments in the rail sector and, thirdly – something that many of you spoke about – reinforcing the regulatory supervision of the rail market to ensure fair competition between the operators and, ultimately, lower costs for those who use the service.
The Commission will engage the Ministers in dialogue on these matters, in the permanent form of Ministers of Transport. The rail sector has been a focus of attention and we will make sure that it remains so and actually expands its presence on their agenda. We will soon adopt the recast proposal so it may be tabled in Parliament by September and we look forward to a very fruitful cooperation with you on the forthcoming legislative process, and certainly to visible and tangible results within our lifetime."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples