Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-09-27-Speech-2-300"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050927.22.2-300"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, in considering the draft package, my political group was guided mainly by concern over the role of the railways in the European Union’s transport network, and by their potential for development. In our view, although there is much discussion about liberalisation, the latter is not an end in itself but a means to an end. Many questions arose concerning how to attain that end, namely increasing rail transport. It is important to bear in mind that the European Union is a Union of 25 Member States, and that the rail networks in the new Member States are relatively weak and being restructured. In addition, changes cannot be introduced too suddenly, they should be brought in progressively.
We warned against a situation where the more powerful railway undertakings absorbed the weaker ones. Taking over the market brings with it the duty to provide a public service. It is worth considering whether the final outcome might be that a large railway company’s monopoly in one of the Union’s Member States might not be replaced or extended to become a monopoly by that same company but covering the territory of several Member States? Are we considering any restrictions? It does not seem to us that we are doing so at present.
Commissioner, the road and air transport sectors are enjoying market success in Europe. In their case, however, deregulation was brought in along with liberalisation. A solution that would reconcile market roles with the provision of a public service should therefore be found for the railways also.
I cooperated with Mr Jarzembowski concerning the changes to Council Directive 91/440/EEC. This compromise is more radical than the Commission’s proposal, so I would like to enquire whether you feel that perhaps our compromise goes too far, Commissioner? Might it not be preferable to confine ourselves to the Commission’s proposal, so only international transport was affected? Our concern is mainly for the quality of transport services provided.
Allow me to refer to the journey between Warsaw and Brussels by way of example. If you fly with LOT or SNBrussels Airlines you pay EUR 300 and it takes two hours to get to Brussels National airport. If you fly with a low-cost airline you pay EUR 120 and arrive at Charleroi airport. A first class train ticket costs EUR 150 and the journey takes 18 hours. If you chose to travel by private car, the journey takes 13 hours if you keep to the speed limits and the fuel costs EUR 150, but four people can travel together. Is that not an important consideration?"@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples