37 Amendments of Dominique RIQUET related to 2019/2191(INI)
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
A a. whereas four Memoranda of Understanding (MoU) on the cooperation for the deployment of the ERTMS were signed by European Commission and the European rail manufacturers, infrastructure managers and railway undertakings, the last one being in September 2016;
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas important legislative steps have been taken, including the adoption in June 2016 of the Fourth Railway Package, which regulates rail governance issues and reinforces the role of the European Railway Agency (the Agency) as system authority for ERTMS as well as the revision of the Technical Specification for Interoperability for the on-board and trackside Control Command and Signalling (CCS TSI) subsystems adopted by Commission Regulation (EU) 2016/919, which gives legal status to the ETCS Baseline 3 Release 2 and GSM-R Baseline 1 specifications;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas investment in the ERTMS shall form part of the 60% of spending towards climate and environmental objectives and 20% towards the digital transition as defined in the EIM;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Points out that the European Green Deal calls for a major modal shift to rail and that the new Sustainable and Smart Mobility Strategy sets the milestones of doubling high-speed rail traffic by 2030 and rail freight traffic by 2050 which require a share increase in rail transport capacity that cannot be obtained without an acceleration of the roll-out of the ERTMS;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Recalls that the ERTMS was launched in the 1990s and its aim is to ensure safety of the railway traffic, to foster interoperability among national rail networks and cross-border rail transport, to reduce the purchasing and maintenance costs of the signalling systems as well as to increase the capacity of the infrastructure and the reliability of the rail transport system;
Amendment 33 #
2a. Stresses that the ERTMS is helping to create a single European railway area and, thereby, to move road freight on to the railways;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that the ERTMS has become a global standard for train control and communication, and has been deployed in almost 50 countries around the world providing for excellent opportunities to increase high value business and expertise within Europe and for export; calls for the establishment of a European Standardised Traffic Management system, and believes that a European standard must be swiftly developed before a global rail traffic management system standard is imposed on the EU;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the Commission’s work to establish a Control Command and Signalling (CCS) architecture framework to ensure that rail fully embraces digitalisation that builds the ERTMS which should allow for easier and more affordable updates and upgrades thanks to further standardisation and modularisation, by introducing the “plug- and-play” principle and by working on harmonised data modelling;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Believes that the Agency should be provided with the appropriate financial resources and powers to overcome the challenges of ERTMS deployment and functioning that still exist (harmonisation of operational rules and requirement, specification maintenance and change, and public procurement procedures etc.); , stresses that, despite the new powers entrusted to the Agency upon adoption of the Fourth Railway Package, the EU's contribution to the Agency's budget has fallen on the grounds that this has been offset by the new fees;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Believes that the Agency should be provided with the appropriate financial and human resources and powerss well as be further empowered in order to overcome the challenges of ERTMS deployment and functioning that still exist (harmonisation of operational rules and requirement, specification maintenance and change, and public procurement procedures etc.); and to lead the technical introduction of new technologies;
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Believes that the Agency should be provided with the appropriate financial resources and powers to overcome the challenges of ERTMS deployment and functioning that still exist (harmonisation of operational rules and requirement, specification maintenance and change, and public procurement procedures, length of type-approval procedures etc.);
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Believes there is a need for a regulatory framework for the digitalisation of the rail system, and welcomes the contribution of Shift2Rail Joint Undertaking (S2R JU) for addressing the removal of remaining technical obstacles holding back the rail sector in terms of interoperability and through the transition to a more integrated, efficient and safe EU railway market, guaranteeing the proper interconnection of technical solutions; strongly supports its new successor initiative, the system pillar, which coordinates the evolution of the system, new technology developments, migration plans, industrialisation and deployment, especially for the ERTMS, with a view to contributing to more efficient collaboration and better use of scarce resources;
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Stresses that the cost of upgrading trackside and on-board systems varies widely depending on the network;
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10b. Welcomes the satisfactory results demonstrated by ERTMS in terms of speed, capacity and safety wherever it has been deployed; notes that ERTMS equipment is a factor affecting the profitability of rail transport in that it enables the operating density of a line to be increased;
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Draws attention to the difficulties associated with frequent changes in standards, which limit the lifespan of equipment in an unpredictable way for those involved in the rail sector and can, therefore, act as a disincentive to investment; stresses, therefore, the importance of moving towards a situation of regulatory stability in order to allow for a return on the investment made;
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)
Paragraph 11 b (new)
11b. Notes that investment in ERTMS is not systematically targeted on the core network, as the TEN-T deployment plans and guidelines recommended, or even on isolated sections unconnected to the core network; stresses on the need to correlate investment in trackside and on-board systems;
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 c (new)
Paragraph 11 c (new)
11c. Notes that GNSS can help streamline the costs of ERTMS and speed up its roll-out; deplores the delay in the use of this technology, partly due to the exclusive focus on the deployment of the beacon-based system;
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 d (new)
Paragraph 11 d (new)
11d. Calls for cooperation between the European Union Agency for Railways and the European GNSS Agency to be stepped up in order to phase GNSS into ERTMS standards;
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 e (new)
Paragraph 11 e (new)
11e. Notes that the equipment's useful lifespan, at an average of around 30 years, makes for a long investment depreciation period, something that, while hindering renewal of the equipment, acts as a major economic criterion in the balance of decision-making on operations carried out;
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Points out that there are still currently roughly 30 different national signalling systems; highlights that the Class B systems are a bottleneck for ERTMS rollout and for cross-border operations of rail traffic in European network, require a more expensive and difficult safety authorisation for operators, and are a barrier to the competitiveness of the rail transport hampering the technical and operational compatibility of railways across the EU, and resulting in additional costs for the sector, including for maintenance;
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Points out that there are still currently roughly 30 different national signalling systems and that this plurality of systems partly explains the variability of ERTMS deployment costs; highlights that the Class B systems are a bottleneck for ERTMS roll-out and for cross-border operations of rail traffic in European network, require a more expensive and difficult safety authorisation for operators, and are a barrier to the competitiveness of the rail transport;
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14 a. Reminds that the incompatibilities between the different ERTMS trackside versions already deployed shall be eliminated and future compatibility for all ERTMS lines shall be ensured and in this sense calls for further cooperation between ERA and the infrastructure managers and national safety authorities;
Amendment 103 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Calls on the Commission, moreover, to introduce a regulatory provision to ensure that the ERTMS NIPs are legally aligned – in both regulatory and geographic terms – with the binding ERTMS deployment targets set in EU legislation;
Amendment 114 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Stresses that the timeframe of authorisation processes for retrofit projects still differ because of diverging assessments by the National Security Agencies (NSAs) on the need to re- authorise certain modifications; calls on the Commission to ensure that the authorisation procedures following type authorisation processes are streamlined by means of fast-tracked control operations believes, moreover, that conformity processes should further strengthen the involvement at an early stage of the industrial suppliers and the NSAs concerned in order to promote the large- scale and ambitious deployment initiatives from the railway undertakings;
Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Stresses that the timeframe of authorisation processes for retrofit projects still differ because of diverging assessments by the National Security Agencies (NSAs) on the need to re- authorise certain modifications; calls on the Commission to ensure that the authorisation procedures following type authorisation processes are streamlined and harmonised by means of fast-tracked control operations;
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18 a. Recalls that in accordance with the recent business case study on the nine core network corridors, the dual on-board migration strategy for ERTMS deployment, which focuses on equipping the fleet with ERTMS at first, has a better economic outcome, compared to the dual track-side migration strategy; believes that the track-side migration strategy, which focuses on installing ERTMS on installed on top of legacy systems which are kept operational until the whole fleet is equipped, should also be accelerated, especially in light of the upcoming alignment of the Rail Freight Corridor Regulation with the revision of the TEN-T guidelines and, in this respect calls for further cooperation between ERA, the infrastructure managers and national safety authorities to achieve full compatibility of ERTMS trackside versions;
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19 a. Underlines that without standardised interfaces with a “plug-and- play” approach – both trackside and on- board –, the rail system will not be able to introduce and grasp the benefits of the ERTMS game changers like automatic train operation (ATO), future radio mobile communication system (FRMCS), satellite positioning or Level 3;
Amendment 121 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 b (new)
Paragraph 19 b (new)
19 b. Points out that GNSS signal availability relies on virtual balises, which would be less costly to deploy and to maintain; calls on the EU rail industry to develop technical solutions in order for GNSS to enable ERTMS on a large scale; calls moreover on the Commission to consider the introduction of EGNSS in the upcoming ERTMS TSI CCS revision in order to close the residual technological gaps and to embrace the innovation;
Amendment 132 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22 a. Notes that during the period 2014- 2020, the EU budget supported ERTMS deployment with an estimated total budget of EUR 2.7 billion, out of which EUR 850 million from CEF and EUR 1.9 billion from European Structural and Investments Funds (ERDF and Cohesion Fund) in the eligible regions;
Amendment 148 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Recalls that EU funds are not sufficient to cover all the expected needs. and therefore calls on the Commission and Member States to cooperate closely to further improve the attractiveness of investing in the ERTMS, and to guarantee legal certainty for private investors; notes that the duration of EIM grant agreements could be extended to better reflect the actual duration of ERTMS project implementation;
Amendment 154 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25a. Stresses the priority nature of funding equipment for cross-border links; takes the view that, since the EU co- financing rates for ERTMS are insufficient, they should be increased by drawing up a priority list of the most important cross-border links on the network;
Amendment 158 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 b (new)
Paragraph 25 b (new)
25b. Calls for the Agency to be systematically consulted in assessing the compliance of EU-funded projects with the technical specifications for interoperability in order to avoid difficulties concerning compatibility of the ERTMS versions installed;
Amendment 160 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 c (new)
Paragraph 25 c (new)
25c. Stresses the need for EU funds to to be granted to new railway line projects only if they include ERTMS equipment;
Amendment 161 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 d (new)
Paragraph 25 d (new)
25d. Calls on the Commission to take account of ERTMS equipment when defining the rail connectivity index;
Amendment 162 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 e (new)
Paragraph 25 e (new)
25e. Stresses that the investment needed to deploy ERTMS on the core network is estimated at EUR 12 billion for trackside systems and EUR 5 billion for onboard systems;
Amendment 163 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 f (new)
Paragraph 25 f (new)
25f. Stresses that new funding from the Recovery and Resilience Facility is required for ERTMS roll-out, calls on the Commission to ensure that such projects are included in national recovery plans;
Amendment 164 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 g (new)
Paragraph 25 g (new)
25g. Stresses that the method of calculating EU aid for ERTMS equipment, based on a flat rate per kilometre, is suitable for linear sections but less appropriate for urban nodes which require many trackside objects and complex ERTMS settings over a short distance; suggests considering a breakdown of costs by the number sets of points on the track;