{"change_dates":[],"dossier":{"amendments":[],"changes":{"2014-11-10T06:03:48":[{"data":[{"body":"all","date":"1994-04-13T00:00:00","text":["
The Council noted the stage reached in discussions on the\n proposal for a directive on the interoperability of the European high-speed\n train network. The Permanent Representatives Committee was instructed to\n expedite its discussions so that the Council could adopt a common position at\n its next meeting in June 1995.
\nThe rapporteur, Mr CASTRICUM (PSE, NL), was critical of\n the fact that the common position of the Council was substantially different\n from the initial proposal put forward by the Commission and from the\n amendments drawn up by Parliament at first reading. Indeed, while the\n Commission’s proposal sought to create a high-speed European network through\n broad-based harmonisation of the different sub-systems, the common position\n focused much more on the technical compatibility of the national components.\n Technical compatibility in this case was being pursued exclusively for the\n benefit of high-speed cross-border traffic. The rapporteur considered that it\n was important to oppose any excessive re-nationalisation of the European\n high-speed train network; he then went on to repeat certain political demands\n that had been drawn up at first reading concerning the development of railway\n networks; finally, he insisted that users of high-speed rail networks should\n be guaranteed easy access. Commissioner Kinnock stated that the Commission\n was prepared to take over all the amendments tabled by the Committee on\n Transport. However, he could not accept Amendment No 12, as it would\n complicate a system of interoperability that was designed to introduce\n greater simplification; on the other hand, he was ready to accept Amendments\n Nos 6, 7, 8 and 9, which related to technical matters, and No 11, which was\n aimed at protecting the interests of consumers. He too was dismayed at the\n common position of the Council, as the delays this could produce might well\n undermine the viability of the high-speed transport systems.
\nThe Council noted the stage reached in discussions on the\n proposal for a directive on the interoperability of the European high-speed\n train network. The Permanent Representatives Committee was instructed to\n expedite its discussions so that the Council could adopt a common position at\n its next meeting in June 1995.
\nThe rapporteur, Mr CASTRICUM (PSE, NL), was critical of\n the fact that the common position of the Council was substantially different\n from the initial proposal put forward by the Commission and from the\n amendments drawn up by Parliament at first reading. Indeed, while the\n Commission’s proposal sought to create a high-speed European network through\n broad-based harmonisation of the different sub-systems, the common position\n focused much more on the technical compatibility of the national components.\n Technical compatibility in this case was being pursued exclusively for the\n benefit of high-speed cross-border traffic. The rapporteur considered that it\n was important to oppose any excessive re-nationalisation of the European\n high-speed train network; he then went on to repeat certain political demands\n that had been drawn up at first reading concerning the development of railway\n networks; finally, he insisted that users of high-speed rail networks should\n be guaranteed easy access. Commissioner Kinnock stated that the Commission\n was prepared to take over all the amendments tabled by the Committee on\n Transport. However, he could not accept Amendment No 12, as it would\n complicate a system of interoperability that was designed to introduce\n greater simplification; on the other hand, he was ready to accept Amendments\n Nos 6, 7, 8 and 9, which related to technical matters, and No 11, which was\n aimed at protecting the interests of consumers. He too was dismayed at the\n common position of the Council, as the delays this could produce might well\n undermine the viability of the high-speed transport systems.
\n