WRITTEN QUESTION E-0436/03 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Criteria to protect cross-border train passengers from the restrictions on boarding or disembarking from international trains.
Date: 2003-02-18
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: business policy, carriage of passengers, common transport policy, consumer protection, cross-border transport, organisation of transport, rail transport, railway station, transport company, transport user

C 242 E/132

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

9.10.2003

Is the Commission also aware that the international trains that passengers are now prohibited from
3.
using are often the first or last trains of the day on the route concerned, thereby preventing passengers
from reaching their destination or transfer station as quickly as possible. To give some illustrations, in
2003 on the summer night train from Amsterdam to Paris via Brussels, boarding in Brussels will be
prohibited and in 2002 similar rules were introduced for the Amsterdam-Duisburg-Mannheim-Munich/
Zurich night train (where disembarkation is prohibited as far as Munich and in Basle) and on the
Barcelona-Cebère-Paris/Milan route disembarkation has been prohibited for some time at the French border
and transfer station of Cebère?

Can the Commission confirm that rules of this kind prohibiting embarkation and disembarkation
4.
have been introduced solely in the interests of the railway companies themselves, as a way of making
management easier by reducing the need to check passengers embarking and disembarking?

In the Commission’s view, are there other reasons why railway companies introduce such irritating

5.
measures that inconvenience a section of their passengers?

(2003/C 242 E/138)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0436/03

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(18 February 2003)

Subject: Criteria to protect cross-border train passengers from the restrictions on boarding or disembarking

from international trains

1.
Is the Commission aware that cross-border train passengers who face problems because they are
denied access to some express services and are now dependent on the willingness of conductors to make
exceptions to allow them to board trains, and that it is difficult to discuss the matter because train staff are
under instructions to turn passengers away and to allow the trains to depart rapidly from stations?

2.
Does the Commission share the view that preventing passengers from boarding or disembarking is
extremely bad customer service because the potential passengers on a train bound for their destination are
forced to wait a long time for another train, take a different route, travel for much longer or use a mode of
transport other than the train?

Are measures of this kind compatible with the objectives of the White Paper ‘Time to choose’ on

3.
European transport policy up to the year 2010?

Are the increasing number of rules prohibiting the boarding or disembarking from international
level? Was the Commission

4.
passenger trains the result of an agreement at European or international
involved in the introduction of these measures and the relevant criteria? If so, what criteria now apply?

Is the Commission prepared to take steps to ensure that more passenger-friendly criteria are applied
5.
when introducing or maintaining rules prohibiting embarkation and disembarkation, so that any refusal to
accept passengers, is only permissible if, for instance, the passengers can take another train bound for the
same final destination within half an hour and connecting with the same through trains at the transfer
stations?

Is the Commission including a measure of this kind in the regulation on train passenger rights it

6.
plans for 2003

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-0435/03 and E-0436/03
given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(2 April 2003)

The Commission is aware of the fact that there may be conditions to passengers for embarking and
disembarking a particular cross-border rail service. These conditions are part of the commercial policy of

9.10.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 242 E/133

railway undertakings on which the Commission has no influence. It is up to the Member States to impose
any public service obligations on the railway undertakings in this respect, if they wish to do so.

There could be various reasons for these conditions like comfort and security for passengers in night trains
or operational reasons. The Commission is not aware of any detailed arrangement in this respect from the
railway undertakings. However the limitations to embark and disembark the trains could be due to the
absence in Community law of the right of cabotage in international trains and to the lack of pressure put
on the railway undertakings to attract passengers.

The Commission will in the preparation of a proposal for a regulation for rail passenger rights reflect on
possible ways to improve the conditions of contracts for passengers. And, as requested by the Parliament,
the Commission will make proposals to allow the access rights for international passenger services, in order
to eliminate artificial barriers.

(2003/C 242 E/139)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0438/03

by Jan Mulder (ELDR)
and Toine Manders (ELDR) to the Commission

(18 February 2003)

Subject: Introduction of a national definition of veal by France

At the end of 2002 the French Government introduced a national definition of veal, which applies to all
veal marketed in France. The rules say that only meat from calves less than 195 days old may be marketed
under the name of veal. Meat from calves older than this arbitrary 195-day ceiling may no longer be sold
as veal, as was usual before the new definition was introduced. This is causing a substantial loss of earnings
for the Netherlands veal sector in particular, which has exports to France valued at EUR 300 million a year.

Can the Commission say whether it was notified of this measure by France in accordance with the

1.
relevant procedures?

2.
Does the Commission share the view that a unilateral definition of this kind, based on an arbitrary
age of 195 days not justified by any European regulations or standard practice, is in breach of European
law? This conclusion is based on the case law in the ‘Cassis de Dijon’ case concerning the free movement
of goods in the internal market, which says that a product marketed under a specific name in one Member
State can also be marketed under that name in the other EU Member States.

3.
In view of the major commercial interests at stake here, can the Commission give a ruling on the
regularity of this unilateral measure by France and also indicate what possibilities there are for claims for
damages by the Netherlands export industry and what support the Commission can provide in this
connection?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(24 March 2003)

The Commission was informed on 7 January 2003 of the serious concern of Netherlands veal producers at
the adoption by the French authorities of provisions on the labelling of veal in France.

Under Regulation (EC) No 1760/2000 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 July 2000
establishing a system for the identification and registration of bovine animals and regarding the labelling of
beef and beef products and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 820/97 (1), the French authorities
adopted a set of specifications restricting the age of bovine animals whose meat may be marketed as ‘veal’
in France to six months or 195 days.