10 Amendments of Michel DANTIN related to 2012/2296(INI)
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the technology already exists for road charging systems to be interoperable; whereas the single biggest problem facing the EETS is a lack of political will to implement such a scheme, rather than market or technical issues; and it will form the basis for technical specifications now being drawn up; whereas the EETS is taking time to roll out because of the variety of charging systems in Europe and the resulting need for major adjustments to make them compatible with the current EETS legislation;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Takes the view that the rules on competition and state aid should not result in a lack of competitiveness for the European automobile sector and calls on the Commission to evaluate the plans for restructuring, aid and closer relations between manufacturers in the sector in comparison with those put forward by third countries and in order to kick-start an upturn in growth and employment in this sector in Europe;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Welcomes the Commission’s strategy to deploy alternative fuels charging and refuelling infrastructure for clean vehicles;
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 2
Subheading 2
The EETS: a failure to datestill to be realised and in need of a new directionboost
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Agrees with the Commission that the currentimplementation of the EETS system has been a failurestill to happen, and emphasises that drastic action isincentives are needed in order to create an interoperable EETS; believes that the Commission should draw up proposregrets the fact that the legals for a regulation in the area of interoperability as soon as possible so as to oblige all stakeholders to advance the EETS project; regrets the fact that Member States have on the whole shown little interest in developing the EETSramework necessary to set up the EETS in the Member States has not yet been finalised;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Reiterates the importance of complying with the principle of technological neutrality in the choice of standards in order to protect the investments of first movers and thus encourage innovation in the sector;
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Believes that the Commission’s plans to proceed with regionalisation are not satisfactory, and considers that more wide-ranging measures are needed to bring the EETS to fruition on an EU-wide level; believes that the regionalisation of interoperability serves only to delay the introducof the EETS by clustering the Member States could prove to be a productive stage helping to bring the EETS to fruition ofn a fulln EU-wide systemlevel;
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Believes that there is no will for an EETS on the part ofUnderstands that industry stakeholders, namely toll service providers, road concessions and manufacturers of electronic ‘tags’ and associated equipment, andre taking a risk by investing in the single EETS, and believes that athe regulionalisation isof therefore needed to forc EETS that will, as a result, be brought about more quickly and more easily will encourage stakeholders to come together and create an efficient road charging experience for the end user, particularly in the context of more widespread use of road charging in the future and with a view to rolling out the EETS fully and effectively on an EU-wide scale;
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Recommends that the Commission take firm action against those who fail to cooperate with the current interoperability directive, pending the publication of a new proposal from the Commission for a regulation in the area of EETS and road charging interoperability;