Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-01-14-Speech-2-016"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030114.1.2-016"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"The establishment of the European Agency for the harmonisation of safety and for accelerating interoperability as part of the second railways package must contribute to the process of liberalising and modernising rail transport in Europe. This process was set in motion with the introduction of the first railways package, but it has not been completed by a long chalk, despite the fact that the Transport White Paper places so much emphasis on rail being practically the most important means of transport in the future. If rail really wants to play a role in solving the problem of congestion in Europe, however, it is of vital importance that we not only open up international and national goods markets but cross-border passenger traffic as well. We must revitalise and liberalise the entire sector if we really want rail traffic to take over part of the constantly growing demand for transport.
The sector has suffered years of neglect in the hands of the various governments who controlled the railways – not the big international companies, Mr Meijer. Furthermore, the sector was and still is a bastion of national interests whose main aim is to promote its own interests and not to become involved in cross-border interests. If we view the railway sector in the context of the agreements in the Lisbon Declaration which call upon us to become the most competitive region in the world by 2010, we have to achieve this, otherwise our hearts will be in our boots. Everywhere there are different mains voltages, different railway gauges, big differences in signalling, different languages and safety requirements, locomotives that are not suitable for operating the other side of borders and that are twice as expensive because they have to overcome all these differences.
Furthermore, the rail freight sector only discovered the concept of profit about a year ago. The only thing that was important was volume. Now billions will have to be invested throughout Europe in order to get the infrastructure and rolling stock up to standard. That can only really happen if there is a true sea change and the railway sector discovers the customer and the concepts of punctuality, flexibility and service orientation besides that of profit.
Interoperability and the harmonisation of safety regulations have often been an uphill battle up until now. Every railway company is sticking to its own practices and systems. It will therefore be important for the Railways Agency to set a good example, play a pioneering role and at the same time act in a supervisory capacity. The Railways Agency’s expertise and clear responsibilities are therefore very important. Another condition that must be met if the Agency is to operate efficiently is that it must remain independent and that it has independent experts chosen for their abilities and not as representatives of a particular organisation at its helm. If we are to avoid reverting to traditional national differences, these experts from the industry must therefore not express the viewpoint of their previous employers. It is therefore essential for the Agency to be able to operate completely independently and transparently. The new predominance of historically big companies will result in few newcomers having access to the Agency. The Railways Agency must also have enough powers to be able to execute its tasks properly. I have submitted an amendment in this regard stating that the Agency should establish the preconditions for the uniform issue of safety certificates independently of the national railway companies within which the national safety bodies have to operate. Naturally, train drivers must receive on-the-spot training to enable them to drive on routes in neighbouring countries, but competences with regard to safety certificates must be clear and unambiguous to all concerned.
In general, harmonisation of the safety regulations in Europe is very important for an efficient railway sector. Bureaucratic obstacles must be eliminated as far as possible. I am also pleased with the compromise on Article 3 that we were able to reach with the Group of the Party of European Socialists, the Group of the European Liberal, Democrat and Reform Party and the Confederal Group of the European United Left/Nordic Green Left, concerning the participation of employers’ representatives from the sector in the working parties. On this point I am still of the opinion that it is not desirable to permit worker involvement in purely technical matters. When there are direct consequences for workers’ working conditions, health or safety, however, their voices will naturally be heard and indeed listened to, as the compromise specifies.
In conclusion, therefore, I hope that the Railways Agency will make a positive contribution to the harmonisation of safety and the process of interoperability in Europe, so that it can make an important contribution towards improving rail transport in Europe."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples