Activites

• 2000/05/03 Final act published in Official Journal
  • Directive 2000/9
  • OJ L 106 03.05.2000, p. 0021
• 2000/03/20 Final act signed
• 2000/03/10 End of procedure in Parliament
• #2237
• 1999/12/16 Council Meeting
• #2210
• 1999/10/28 Council Meeting
  • 2210
• 1999/10/27 Decision by Parliament, 2nd reading
  • T5-0072/1999 summary

    The European Parliament adopted the report drafted by Bill MILLER (PES, United Kingdom) and approved the common position subject to a few amendments. These seek to extend the scope of the application of the Directive to all types of transport of persons and not simply to the transport of paying passengers. On the matter of safety standards, the rapporteur felt that it was difficult to see why different standards should apply. The common position was ambiguous on this point. Parliament’s amendments seek to remove this ambiguity and make it clear where it was not clear before that the directive relates to cableway installations for the carriage of persons in general.  Other amendments relate to consolidating text: safeguard clauses are included at three points in the text, which inflated and complicated it. These articles were consolidated and headed ‘safeguards’. 

• 1999/10/25 Debate in Parliament
  • Debate in Parliament
• 1999/10/12 Vote in committee, 2nd reading
  • A5-0028/1999
• 1999/07/23 Committee referral announced in Parliament, 2nd reading
• #2195
• 1999/06/28 Council Meeting
  • 14248/3/1998 summary

    The Council's common position upholds either totally or partially a great majority of the European parliament's amendments (17 in total). The Council, however, introduced some important changes in the substance in comparison with the initial proposal. The common position is based on the following principles: - the installation is broken up into sub-systems and safety components; - the measures initially proposed regarding the installation would from now on apply to each sub-system; - the safety components and the sub-systems may be placed on the market only if they comply with certain essential requirements specified in an annex to the Directive. The verification and the assessment of whether safety components and sub-systems comply with the essential requirements are to be carried out by independent organisations given this responsibility (the so-called 'notified bodies'). The 'EC' mark is introduced and only components bearing this mark can be considered as complying with the essential requirements. - each Member State must lay down procedures for authorising the construction and the putting into service of complete cableway installations and their infrastructure. With respect to comitology, the inclusion of a provision permitting the review of the type of committee (consultative committee) after two years of the Directive's application should be noted.�

• #2130
• 1998/11/09 Council Meeting
• 1995/11/16 Modified legislative proposal published
  • COM(1995)0523 summary

    The Commission's amended proposal retained Parliament's amendments aimed at: - introducing installations for urban transport where specific mechanical requirements were provided for; - clarifying that these installations were not always linked to tourism; - introducing the concept of the cross-border nature of certain installations and the corresponding regulatory issues; - highlighting the importance of the choice of site from the point of view of safety; - extending environmental impact assessments to all sites; - emphasising that the constraints linked to the operation of the installations must be taken into account in the safety analysis; - clarifying the conditions of application of the directive upon its entry into force; - clarifying the conditions of application concerning existing installations where essential safety requirements were not met; - clarifying the definition of safety components; - introducing the concept of authorisation for construction; - doing away with the compulsory nature of the derogation procedure where an innovative approach was concerned; - extending the provisions to cover construction; - clarifying the concept of third parties, including skiers; - extending the notion of external constraints to include the specific environmental characteristics of the sites; - clarifying that the qualifications of the management personnel involved were the responsibility of the Member State. The Commission rejected the amendments which: - stipulated that the Committee could amend the essential requirements in the directive; - proposed that for cross-border installations, the Committee should designate a Member State to lead the operation. �

• 1995/04/06 Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
  • T4-0155/1995 summary

    The European Parliament approved the Commission proposal subject to the following amendments: - the definition of the term "safety component" was clarified; - a definition of "main contractor" was included; - the mechanical lift systems used for certain types of urban transport were included in the scope of the directive; - in the case of installations straddling frontiers, a single Member State should be responsible for the implementation of the directive. This Member State should be appointed according to the procedure provided for in the directive; - environmental studies should also be taken into account so as to ensure the safety of installations; - installations in the process of being constructed at the date of the entry into force of the directive should comply with its provisions where possible, taking account of the progress of the works; authorised installations whose construction had not yet begun on that date should comply with the directive; - the design, manufacture, and operation of the installations should take account of the protection of the environment and the sustainable development requirements of summer or winter tourism. �

• 1995/04/05 Debate in Parliament
  • Debate in Parliament
• 1995/03/23 Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
  • A4-0070/1995
• 1994/02/11 Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
• 1994/01/31 Legislative proposal published
  • COM(1993)0646 summary

    The aim of this proposal for a Council directive was to ensure the free movement of components of cableway installations and of complete cableway installations intended for public transport by harmonising the national provisions on the safety of users and the protection of their health. The installations in question were divisible into five main categories, namely funicular railways, cable cars, gondolas, chair lifts and drag lifts. As far as components were concerned, the proposed directive was based on the new approach to technical harmonisation and standardisation. As far as complete installations were concerned, in view of the need to open up markets and protect users, the proposal provided for a Community commissioning procedure (verification). In both of these contexts, regulation was limited to essential requirements, and the details of implementation were left to the Member States and to the European standardisation system.�

Documents

• Legislative proposal published: COM(1993)0646
• Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading: A4-0070/1995
• Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
• Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T4-0155/1995
• Modified legislative proposal published: COM(1995)0523
• Council position published: 14248/3/1998
• Committee recommendation tabled for plenary, 2nd reading: A5-0028/1999
• Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
• Decision by Parliament, 2nd reading: T5-0072/1999
• Debate in Council: 2210
• : Directive 2000/9
• : OJ L 106 03.05.2000, p. 0021

History

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