Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-07-02-Speech-1-051-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20120702.17.1-051-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, since Parliament and the Council agreed quite quickly to postpone any changes regarding vertical separation between infrastructure managers and railway undertakings until the upcoming fourth railway package, and since they also considerably watered down the Commission’s proposals on the separation of stations and maintenance yards, I might have been able to express complete satisfaction on this subject today.
Unfortunately, I have recently found out that the Commission took advantage of this recast, in breach of the applicable rules, to amend paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 7 on the notorious ‘essential functions’, on the sly and with no explanation whatsoever. If this amendment to the existing legislation is adopted, it will make the alternative solution to the complete separation that the Commission has favoured for a long time less cohesive and less effective. What is this other solution? It entails allowing Member States to retain some degree of integration, while still separating the essential functions, so that they can achieve better operational performance for both passengers and goods.
At a time when the United Kingdom is beginning to rethink its decisions, and people are seeing that complete separation is not the best way to go, I do not see why we should rush to adopt this single model for everyone today. I therefore cannot support the proposed directive on the recast of the first railway package, even though I am in favour of strong regulation and transparency of financial flows."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples