This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 92002E001078(01)
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1078/02 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Cross-border rail link between Groningen and Bremen; long delays in replacing the section of the track between Nieuweschans and Leer.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1078/02 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Cross-border rail link between Groningen and Bremen; long delays in replacing the section of the track between Nieuweschans and Leer.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1078/02 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Cross-border rail link between Groningen and Bremen; long delays in replacing the section of the track between Nieuweschans and Leer.
Dz.U. C 52E z 6.3.2003, p. 32–33
(ES, DA, DE, EL, EN, FR, IT, NL, PT, FI, SV)
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1078/02 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Cross-border rail link between Groningen and Bremen; long delays in replacing the section of the track between Nieuweschans and Leer.
Official Journal 052 E , 06/03/2003 P. 0032 - 0033
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1078/02 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (18 April 2002) Subject: Cross-border rail link between Groningen and Bremen; long delays in replacing the section of the track between Nieuweschans and Leer 1. Does the Commission recall my question No E-0178/00(1) of 31 January 2000 concerning suspension of the rail service between Groningen in the Netherlands and the German connecting station of Leer on the line to Bremen following the upgrading of 17 kms of track between the border towns of Nieuweschans and Weener, and your answer of 30 March 2000 with the reassuring conclusion that upgrading of the section of the track would be carried out during 2000, after which the rail companies DB Regio and NoordNed would operate the route? 2. Is the Commission aware that since its answer to my question the train service was suspended from 28 May 2000 until 1 December 2000 but that services cannot be resumed because replacing the much neglected track did not start until the second half of 2001? 3. To what extent are these delays and obstacles caused by German and Dutch plans which keep cropping up concerning the construction of a maglev line (TransRapid) linking Amsterdam, Lelystad, Groningen, Bremen, Hamburg, Schwerin and Berlin which would involve shifting existing traffic flows to a border crossing near Nieuweschans and Leer? Do these plans still play a serious role in the decisions on the future of the conventional railway between Groningen and Bremen? 4. Does this section of the track, including stations, bridges and level crossings, now comply with all the standards for improvement that were stipulated when financial aid was granted in the framework of the trans-European transport network and the Interreg programme? Have all the funds made available by the EU since been spent for the purposes for which they were intended? If not, why not? 5. Are there still any technical reasons, apart from the disputes relating to operation of the line referred to in the following questions, preventing the rail service from being resumed on this section of the track without delay? Source: Het Openbaar Vervoer / Railnieuws, Volume 45 No 522, March 2002, rail@wanadoo.nl (1) OJ C 330 E, 21.11.2000, p. 98. Supplementary joint answerto Written Questions E-1078/02, E-1079/02 and E-1080/02given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission (27 September 2002) The Commission has been informed by the relevant German and Dutch authorities that the upgrading of the Groningen-Leer railway line has been completed, and that currently three trains in each direction are being operated, with a change-over in Nieuweschans (NL) at the Dutch-German border. By the end of 2002, it is foreseen to increase traffic to seven direct-trains per direction. The public authorities have organised a public tender for the service in 1999/2000. The contract has been rewarded to Noordned for the domestic services in Groningen. For the cross-border service various difficulties regarding e.g. rolling stock and certified staff, have evolved before it was possible to actually contract the service with the railway undertaking Noordned and Dbregio. The Organisation, gestion, marketing (OGM) study(1) the Commission launched to assess the actual and potential market for international rail passenger services, showed that public authorities often fail to regulate regional cross-border-rail services and that service levels deteriorate. In the case of the Groningen-Leer service, the public authorities on both sides of the border actually decided to take action to contract regional-cross border rail services and successfully implemented this. Another example of a successful re-opening of a cross-border link is the service operated between Gronau (D) and Enschede (NL), for which the Interreg program provided funds to upgrade the railway line. As announced in the Communication Towards an integrated European railway area(2), the Commission will take action to improve cross-border rail transport and it will propose a regulation for rail passenger rights. The upgrading of the existing Groningen-Leer railway line, subject to co-financing decisions in the framework of the trans-European transport network (TEN) and the Interreg Programme, serves the improvement of cross-borders rail services in the short and medium term. The construction of a magnetic levitation line between Amsterdam-Groningen-Bremen and Hamburg has not been considered in the framework of the trans-European transport network so far; any such proposal would have to be substantiated by a sound demonstration of its technical, economic and financial viability. The relevant national authorities have confirmed vis-à-vis the Commission that the upgrading project has been carried out in accordance with the original objectives. As far as the transport TEN contribution is concerned, the Commission plans to formally close the funding decision in autumn 2002, following a final technical and financial control. The Commission is not aware of any technical factors that could impede the immediate opening of services on the line. (1) See http://europa.eu.int/comm/transport/rail/library/ogm-report.pdf. (2) COM(2002) 18 final.