Parliament backs down on railway liberalisation

French Socialist MEP Gilles Savary welcomed the adoption of his report on a European licence for train drivers saying it was "essential for railway security". 

As regards the opening of domestic railways, he said that although Europe would ultimately go in this direction, it should not do so on the sole basis of "an incomplete and misleading battle about dates and deadlines". Speaking on behalf of the French Socialist delegation, he added that the proposals on opening up national networks lacked "clear and credible guarantees as regards the financing of railways’ public service missions". This, he said, would simply lead to "a pitiless commercial war between a very small number of existing major companies for access to high-speed lines and the networks of new member states". 

Green Transport Spokesman Michael Cramer said: "The idea that rail passengers' rights change as a train crosses the border between member states is senseless and incoherent, so it is important to establish these rights at EU-level. However, the logic behind these rights clearly applies whether or not the train crosses borders and the rights should therefore apply to all trains. This is true whether with regard to access rights for persons with reduced mobility or rights for compensation for passengers in the cases of delay or cancellation." 

Dutch MEP Erik Meijer of the GUE/NGL group welcomed the rejection of the Jarzembowski report, which he claims "attempts to introduce even more 'co-operation-destroying' competition”. Meijer explained that, because of past EU legislation, Europe must live with various companies competing with each other on the same territory "to the detriment of public service and efficiency". "We are pushing medium-distance train travellers onto planes. The more public transport is dependent on the market, the more limited its chance of survival. That development is bad for passengers, bad for railway staff and bad for the protection of our environment," he said. 

Belgian rapporteur Dirk Sterckx (ALDE)  said that there was no point in drawing up a regulation which applied only to the 5% rail passengers who use international train services. "Ordinary rail passengers should not be left out in the cold," he said. 

According to the International Association for Public Transport (UITP), the third railway package ignores the specificities of suburban and regional railways and risks hindering the development of these forms of short-distance transport that are crucial to helping European cities deal with congestion and pollution problems. 

Michel Quidort, chairman of the UITP Regional Railway Committee, stressed that EU rules on passenger rights must not be applied to regional rail, but rather dealt with inside a contract between the local authority and the local operator. "The subsidiarity principle must be applied to avoid creating an impossible bureaucratic situation and to accommodate very specific local conditions," he stressed. 

The Community of European Railway and Infrastructure Companies (CER)  said that the regulation on passenger rights would best not be extended to domestic traffic. "Member states are best placed to manage their national transport needs in application of the subsidiarity principle," said Colin Hall, CER deputy executive director. He added: "Parliament’s adoption of the requirement for a special designated area for passenger equipment in all trains is a real practical concern [that] would inevitably lead to the situation that a substantial part of rolling stock in the European Union would not be in line with European law."

The European Consumers’ Organisation (BEUC) stated: "We do support the application of the regulation to every passenger, ie international and national, as we think that every passenger should be able to benefit from the same minimum level of protection across the EU…It would be difficult to argue that national passengers have more limited rights compared with international passengers."