Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-02-11-Speech-3-263"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040211.10.3-263"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the Commissioner is right: intermodal transport is competitive only to a limited extent, and the existing units – whether they are containers or swap bodies –cannot be easily used in all four modes of transport. The complicated and lengthy process of trans-shipment not only wastes a great deal of time; it also costs a great deal of money. By its very nature, intermodal transport is therefore at a disadvantage. Firstly, it is far more complex and therefore more complicated to organise, and secondly, there are very few actors who have a clear overview of the whole intermodal chain. That is why we must promote intermodal transport, and that is what we are doing with this directive.
The purpose of the directive is three-fold: firstly, to create a new loading unit, the
European intermodal loading unit; secondly, to establish specific intermodality requirements for all new loading units, and we hope that at least in the medium term, we will therefore be able to halve the trans-shipment time at terminals; and thirdly, to improve safety in line with
the International Convention for Safe Containers (CSC). Perhaps it was slightly misleading for the Commission to present the directive as part of the programme for the Promotion of Short Sea Shipping. Yes, of course it will benefit short sea shipping, but what we are talking about here is the entire transport chain and intermodal standardisation the like of which has not been seen before. As a rule, it is the individual modes of transport which are standardised, or standardisations are introduced for specific aspects of an individual mode of transport. This directive is therefore a first.
The purpose of standardisation, however, is not only to identify an ideal technical solution. Through standardisation, we will achieve planning and investment security, reduce barriers to market entry as well as product costs, and open up new markets. I am convinced that Europe needs the best possible intermodal loading unit combining the advantages of containers with the advantages of swap units. It would be a kind of European supercontainer, capable of being used on all modes of transport and trans-shipped easily. It would be stackable and lifted from its top corners; it would be suitable for use on ships, offer maximum space for transporting ISO palettes, and enable loading and unloading to take place quickly.
The Commission estimates that the number of road vehicles required to transport the same amount of goods would be reduced by 25% if the new supercontainer were used. I think that is slightly optimistic, but at least it points in the direction of change. Fears that the use of existing loading units would no longer be permissible are unjustified. The use of the new supercontainer is not made mandatory by the directive; instead, the market must regulate it. This means that different units will continue to be in circulation, but the European loading unit will become the market leader because of its stated benefits. I too believe that it will be a great success in the export market. China and Russia are two massive markets to be conquered, and the expected increase in the transportation of goods to Eastern Europe speaks for itself.
Nor does the directive affect the ISO norm. We have managed to assuage concerns about this issue through amendments to the Commission’s text. Cellular container ships, for example, are currently configured according to applicable ISO standards. We have stipulated that safe stowage inside and on deck of existing cellular container ships must be possible without adaptation of currently existing cell guides. We have also stipulated an external height of 2 900 mm, which corresponds to the height laid down by the European Organisation for Standardisation (CEN). We have thus created the best possible loading unit for road and rail.
It must, though, be the European standardisation bodies, in conjunction with industry, that have the task of developing the detail of the standardisation. We have simply set a framework for this process. We wanted, or want, to create a standardisation procedure based on a mandate, so that standardisation can proceed more quickly. Efforts to achieve this have been under way for a long time, but they have not been concluded.
This directive is merely the start of the process. Apart from the loading units, there are many other possible areas of intermodal transport where standardisation would be possible, for example at the interfaces between infrastructure and services, that is, terminals, trans-shipment facilities and, of course, information systems, liability and contractual regulations.
Standardisation will therefore continue. I am pleased that we have made a start here, sending out a clear signal in favour of intermodal transport."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples