Activites

• 1995/06/27 Final act published in Official Journal
  • Directive 1995/19
  • OJ L 143 27.06.1995, p. 0075
• #1857
• 1995/06/19 Council Meeting
• 1995/06/19 End of procedure in Parliament
• 1995/06/19 Act adopted by Council after consultation of Parliament
• 1995/05/05 Modified legislative proposal published
  • COM(1995)0151
• 1995/03/14 Debate in Parliament
  • Debate in Parliament
  • T4-0088/1995 summary

    Parliament changed the Council common position with six amendments. These amendments seek to: - extend the scope of the directive by removing the exclusion of railway undertakings only providing urban, suburban or regional services or transport operations using the Channel Tunnel shuttle. This amendment was introduced in a vote separate from the Council common position; - exclude tourist and historic railways from the definition of railway undertaking. The Commission accepted this amendment; - include under specific forms of operation lines using combined multimodal transport and specify that train paths belonging to this type of specialised infrastructure must be distributed fairly and on a non-discriminatory basis. The Commission accepted this amendment; - recognise that infrastructure managers may fund infrastructure improvements, including the supply or renewal of physical assets, and profit from the capital invested. The Commission accepted this amendment; - avoid any risk of distortion of competition between the various modes of transport, while ensuring that user charges are allocated fairly and on the basis of the principle of true costs. The Commission did not accept this amendment; - establish a differentiated procedure for the treatment of applications for the use of infrastructure capacity. The Commission accepted this amendment.�

• 1995/02/21 Vote in committee, 2nd reading
  • A4-0027/1995
• 1994/12/15 Committee referral announced in Parliament, 2nd reading
• #1803
• 1994/11/21 Council Meeting
  • 09858/1/1994 summary

    Overall, the common position maintains the Commission proposal, but the Council has introduced important amendments to the initial proposal. The main amendments are as follows: - the scope of the directive has been limited to railway undertakings governed by Article 10 of Directive 91/440/EEC; - responsibilities allocated to the infrastructure manager: Member States may make the infrastructure manager responsible for allocating train paths and/or collecting infrastructure user charges (including where the manager is also the railway transport service operator), railway undertakings may take recourse to an independent body and the possibility of recourse to the courts is guaranteed; - special rights may be granted in a further two cases compared with the Commission proposal, viz. where they are indispensable to efficient usage of the infrastructure capacity and funding of new infrastructure; - a number of safety conditions which the railway undertaking must comply with in order to obtain a safety certificate have been laid down; - the Commission is to present an application report accompanied by proposals for further Community action; - deadline for transposition of the directive: two years after it enters into force. The common position also includes the European Parliament's amendments seeking to: - adopt the definition of "infrastructure manager" in Directive 91/440/EEC; - give Member States the facility to make an agency other than a government authority responsible for allocation; - give Member States the facility to take the action provided for in Article 4.1 in lieu of the allocation agency; - delete the obligation to enclose proof that the operating staff has the required knowledge with the application; - provide for the facility to also grant special rights as regards the allocation of infrastructure capacity where these rights are indispensable to efficient usage of the infrastructure capacity.�

• #1785
• 1994/09/26 Council Meeting
• 1994/07/14 Modified legislative proposal published
  • COM(1994)0316 summary

    The amended proposal incorporates the amendments by the European Parliament concerning: - the addition of a new paragraph clarifying when an infrastructure manager can act as an allocating agency without there being any conflict of interest; - the procedures for allocating infrastructure capacities: a distinction has been made between applications for specific trains and applications for scheduled services. However, the Commission rejected amendments seeking to: - make provision for all applicants to have the same chance of obtaining train paths being allocated for the first time; - make provision for the Member States to be allowed to grant special or exclusive infrastructure rights where they are essential to efficient use of the infrastructure; - include a principle to be applied by the Member States when defining rules on infrastructure user charges, viz. that these charges must also be collected for other modes of transport; - include a principle to be applied by the Member States when defining rules on infrastructure user charges, viz. that preferential rates are prohibited.�

• #1768
• 1994/06/13 Council Meeting
  • 1768 summary

• 1994/05/03 Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
  • T3-0376/1994
• 1994/05/02 Debate in Parliament
  • Debate in Parliament summary

• 1994/04/06 Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
  • A3-0217/1994
• 1994/02/07 Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
• 1993/12/15 Legislative proposal published
  • COM(1993)0678 summary

    This proposal sought to establish common rules for the allocation of railway infrastructure capacity and the charging of fees for its use. The two basic objectives were non-discrimination and efficiency. The principle was an allocation of capacity according to market need, subject to a number of exceptions, e.g. for the provision of services of a social nature, of general interest or where technical reasons made these necessary (dedicated infrastructure for high-speed lines). All these exceptions would attract compensatory payment. Similarly, operators in certain regions or which provided certain essential services under the public service obligation might be declared priority operators without prejudice to the application of the rules on competition. To make sure that infrastructure costs could be met in full, their manager had to cover all the costs of the system. Member States would ultimately be responsible for setting detailed principles for the charging system, which should be consistent with the principles of market pricing. These principles would be set by a process of coordination with the manager, who would oversee their implementation. Users would be given advance notice of the fees. Provision was also made for the possibility of group payments for a range of social services which received state aid. �

Documents

• Legislative proposal published: COM(1993)0678
• Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading: A3-0217/1994
• Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
• Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T3-0376/1994
• Debate in Council: 1768
• Modified legislative proposal published: COM(1994)0316
• Council position published: 09858/1/1994
• Committee recommendation tabled for plenary, 2nd reading: A4-0027/1995
• Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
• Decision by Parliament, 2nd reading: T4-0088/1995
• Modified legislative proposal published: COM(1995)0151
• : Directive 1995/19
• : OJ L 143 27.06.1995, p. 0075

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)