WRITTEN QUESTION E-0585/03 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Progress towards standardisation and interchangeability of high-speed trains in Europe.
Date: 2003-02-28
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: common transport policy, cross-border transport, harmonisation of standards, high-speed transport, rail network, rail transport, trans-European network, vehicle on rails

C 242 E/152

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

9.10.2003

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(8 April 2003)

the national and local authorities. Without doubt,

The design of subway systems, to which the Honourable Member refers, remains under the direct
responsibility of
the Commission attributes high
importance to passenger safety. To this end, increased public concern regarding the risks to which the
public is potentially exposed has been addressed by the Commission in the recent ‘second railway package’.
Within the package, the Commission has presented a draft Directive (1) promoting common safety targets
and common safety methods for community railway systems in the Member States, (currently examined by
the Council). The proposed Directive clearly provides a certain margin for Member States in the adoption
of implementation measures for subways, tramways and other light rail infrastructures. It also leaves the
possibility to Member States to extend such safety requirements, to urban rail infrastructures in order to
enforce higher levels of protection.

Furthermore, following the recommendations of a recent study commissioned by the Commission on
‘Obstacles to the Internal Market on Rail Mass Transit’
(RMT) (2), the Commission is evaluating the
possibility of launching a consultation with all the concerned parties on the harmonisation of safety
requirements for RMT installations. This is to ensure that all views are heard before considering whether to
embark on a legislative proposal covering the issue.

(1) OJ C 126 E, 28.5.2002.
(2) http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/rail_guided_transport/rail_mass_transit.pdf.

(2003/C 242 E/158)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0585/03

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(28 February 2003)

Subject: Progress towards standardisation and interchangeability of high-speed trains in Europe

How can the Commission be certain that the French LGV-Est, which in 2006 will

1.
link Paris to
Nancy, Metz and Strasbourg, can, as planned, be used in cross-border services not only with modernised
French TGV PDSE, but also with German ICE, equipment?

2.
How can the Commission be certain that the cross-border Perpignan-Figueres route via the Pertuis
tunnel, which is due to be opened in 2006, can be used both by variants of the French TGV and the
Spanish Velaro/AVE S 103 and Talgo 350?

3.
How are the technical specifications of body-tilt coaches, axle drives, couplings, platform height and
maximum speed of high-speed trains geared to each other in such a way that, provided they are equipped
for use with different voltages, they can run on all the high-speed lines in Europe?

4.
Are the recently designed Spanish Talgo 350 and French Elisa/Automotrice à Grande Vitesse the first
trains to meet the standards of complete interchangeability and the highest safety standards, or is this only
true of trains of the next, or a still later, generation?

5.
How is it to be achieved that tracks and rolling stock throughout Europe will in the short term meet
the highest safety standards and be fully interchangeable and accessible? What is the role in this context of
the SNCF, DB and Trenitalia High Speed Europe project, which claims to be working towards one single
type of high-speed train? Why are other European countries with high-speed trains (Spain, Sweden) not
involved in it?

By what date does the Commission expect the results of the project referred to in point 5 to be

6.
available as regards existing equipment, and by what date as regards new equipment?

9.10.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 242 E/153

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(25 April 2003)

the Commission indicated in its answers

As
to Written Questions E-0473/03 (1), E-0580/03 (2),
E-0583/03 (3) and E-0584/03 (4) by the Honourable Member, the process of formulating Community rules
began on the basis of Council Directive 96/48/EC of 23 July 1996 on the interoperability of the trans-
European high-speed rail system (5) and Directive 2001/16/EC of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 19 March 2001 on the interoperability of the trans-European conventional rail system (6). These
Directives introduced a procedure for adopting technical specifications for interoperability (TSIs). The first
generation of TSIs for the high-speed system was adopted by the Commission on 30 May 2002 and has
applied to all new infrastructure and rolling stock projects
In certain
circumstances, these TSIs also apply to upgrading and renewal projects.

since 1 December 2002.

Accordingly, the network should not present any technical barriers to the various track and rolling stock
the Honourable Member mentions, due to come into service as of 2006.

The aim of the ‘High Speed Europe’ project would appear to be for the undertakings taking part to come
up with a common set of specifications with a view to ordering a new generation of high-speed trains.
If this is so, this project would contribute to the objectives of interoperability and a single market set by
the EC Treaty. However, the Commission does not yet have the information with which to answer the
Honourable Member’s questions regarding the project; moreover, that information is of a commercial
nature.

(1) See page 134.
(2) See page 149.
(3) See page 150.
(4) See page 151.
(5) OJ L 235, 17.9.1996.
(6) OJ L 110, 20.4.2001.

(2003/C 242 E/159)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0589/03

by Miquel Mayol i Raynal (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(28 February 2003)

Subject: Freedom of association in Romania

Following the reply of 27 June 2002 to my question E-1377/02 (1), in which the Commission states that
freedom of association is covered by the Copenhagen criteria, new developments have occurred in
Romania. The Bucharest Court of Appeal has just confirmed the decision to refuse registration to
Romania’s first regional party, the Liga Transilvania-Banat. The Court stated, inter alia, that regionalism
and subsidiarity are principles that run counter to the unitary and indivisible character of the Romanian
state.

Is the banning of a democratic political party compatible with the spirit of the accession criteria defined in
Copenhagen? Does the Commission intend to ask the Romanian authorities for an explanation?

(1) OJ C 28 E, 6.2.2003, p. 100.

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(3 April 2003)

The Commission’s reply to question E-1377/02 noted that the Romanian constitution prohibits giving a
legal status to organisations whose goals and activities are against the principles of the Romanian state.
These principles include respect for the sovereignty and the territorial integrity of Romania.

The Commission does not have the legal competence to assess whether or not the Romanian constitution,
as interpreted by this level of the Romanian court system, places an unjustified prohibition of the freedom