Simpson (PSE). – Mr President, firstly I would like to thank all the rapporteurs for their work in this very important area. This is a difficult and complex subject not made any easier by the position that the whole railway industry finds itself in. If you look at rail freight in Europe, for example, the drop in traffic is quite alarming. If nothing is done, then within the next 15 years rail freight will not exist.

There has to be change in how railways work, both in the passenger and freight sectors. The industry itself has to recognise that its service levels have been unacceptable and Member States must also recognise that investment levels have been in decline for many years. This is nowhere more apparent than in the field of interoperability: 15 different systems, different signalling systems, different power currents and an obsession at national level with working their own system to the detriment of international cooperation and to the detriment of interoperability.

It is the inability of a train to cross borders without changing locomotives, changing drivers or even changing bogeys that is the problem for our railways. A 40-tonne heavy goods lorry is fully interoperable. A freight train is not. That is the difficulty that faces the industry. It is not an easy problem to overcome. We need to give the railways time to improve their interoperability, but we must also remind them that time is running out and frankly with regard to freight the industry is now drinking in the last chance saloon.

I, on behalf of my group, have followed the report by Mr Sterckx with regard to safety more closely than the others. It is our belief that in any work in the area of safety those who work in the sector must be involved. In this regard a difference exists between us and the PPE-DE Group. Our main goals are to ensure higher levels of safety whilst fully integrating our European rail system. We must get away from the 15 different systems I mentioned earlier; however, we must ensure that Member States have an input, and in those areas where higher standards exist we must insist that they are maintained. Dilution of safety standards is not an option. That is why, as a group, we have submitted a number of amendments to Mr Sterckx's report.

All of us here are supporters of railways. Indeed some of us are somewhat fanatical and are often called anoraks by our colleagues. I hope the Commission proposals and Parliament's response are seen by those in the railway industry as an honest attempt to ensure that Europe's railway industry has a future. In order to reach that goal we need politicians, we need governments, we need the Commission, but most of all we also need all sides in the railway industry working together.