Proposition 52K0076

Proposition de résolution relative à l'amélioration de l'accessibilité des transports en commun.

General information ¶

Authors

PS | SP Colette Burgeon, Jean-Marc Delizée
Vooruit David Geerts

Submission date

July 30, 2007

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

resolution of parliament means of public conveyance

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

Groen CD&V Vooruit Ecolo LE PS | SP Open Vld N-VA LDD MR FN VB

Contact form ¶

Do you have a question or request regarding this proposition? Select the most appropriate option for your request and I will get back to you shortly.

Discussion ¶

May 7, 2009 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Secretary of State, dear colleagues, based on various findings, this proposal of resolution signed by Mr. Delicate, by Mrs. Burgeon and by Mr. Geerts suggests to the federal government various goals and actions to improve the accessibility of public transport for people with reduced mobility and to develop an integrated policy. This draft resolution, submitted in July 2007, came to the Commission’s agenda on 12 January 2009, a year and a half after its submission. The finding was very quickly made that developments had taken place in the meantime, including the conclusion of management contracts for the period 2008-2012 for all entities of the SNCB Group.

The committee unanimously decided to hold hearings, which took place on 4 February. Members of the committee were able to get acquainted with the specific measures on accommodation and accessibility in the new management contracts. Several speakers followed. First, the representative of SNCB Holding highlighted the evolution of legislation, the definition of a standard at the group level and the precise objectives in terms of hosting for the period 2008-2012 as well as the action plan that goes well beyond. For this period, the SNCB is committed to making accessible to people with reduced mobility 52 additional stations.

A second hearing concerned the SNCB, which, as a transport operator, is responsible for the reception of persons with reduced mobility and for the physical assistance provided to them, as well as for the technical specificity of the rolling stock. We were able to get acquainted with the provisions of the management contract on the subject. A service offer is available at 103 stations with reservation 24 hours in advance. This assistance must be of high quality and requires qualified personnel. The different heights of the quai require the use of ad hoc equipment and the training of staff in its use.

As regards rolling stock, we were presented with the various planned investments in the acquisition of trains and the attention paid to persons with reduced mobility, which translates, among other things, into multifunctional spaces.

Finally, Infrabel has situated the action of its group, in particular in the level of the layout of the quads, access to them, the installation of access ramps and elevators. By 2018, 285 stations and stops will be equipped with standard height boards and 38 stations with 52% of total passenger capacity will be fully equipped by the end of 2012.

This was followed by a discussion consisting of questions/answers on the need for good coordination between the different operators and on the problem of implementation deadlines.

The signatories of the resolution admitted that their recommendations were very quickly exceeded, given the provisions contained in the management contracts. They therefore proposed an amendment to replace the points of the original resolution with three new points, namely to request the federal government to make full accessibility a recurring topic of the Interministerial Conference on Mobility, Infrastructure and Telecommunications; to add to the contents of the annual report on the performance of public service tasks established by SNCB Holding a chapter dedicated to accessibility and its proper implementation; that the three structures (SNCB Holding, Infrabel, SNCB) submit annually to Parliament a report on the achievements of the previous year in terms of accessibility for public transport.

This amendment was co-signed by various groups: Open Vld, CD&V, cdH, MR and Ecolo-Groen!

The entire resolution was adopted unanimously.

Sustainable mobility is at the heart of the major challenges of our society, in its three dimensions: economic, social and environmental. The mobility of individuals and the accessibility of all places of living are essential social requirements as they condition access to habitat, employment, education, culture, family relations and leisure.

As an element of solidarity, mobility is a guarantee of social equity by allowing everyone access to employment, training and public structures. In the economic crisis we are going through, we need to reinforce the possibilities of travel in order to ensure free and accessible mobility for all our fellow citizens.

In its social dimension, sustainable mobility enables equal access for all to social and cultural life. It is an essential factor of social emancipation for our most precarious fellow citizens. For the most vulnerable populations, immobility is also synonymous with retreat or even ghettoisation. We are not only talking about people who are excluded but also people with reduced mobility.

Lastly, sustainable mobility is also a strong environmental issue. It should help reduce greenhouse gas emissions, air pollution and noise.

Mobility has become an unavoidable issue in our society. Taking into account the climate and social challenges of transport pollution and congestion that tends to be widespread, all this forces us to adapt our behaviors. Our travel strategies must now articulate around intermodality, which itself articulates around efficient public transport. An individual car adapted to our needs and our potential disabilities can no longer be the only option. However, the generalization of intermodality and its social acceptance only makes sense if it offers accessibility at least as easy as a personal car. We are talking here about the accessibility of territories, of course, but also about the accessibility of infrastructure and the means of transport themselves.

Moving easily by means of accessible, fast and flexible transportation enables full participation in social, professional and cultural life. Even today, people with reduced mobility are still not in control of their mobility and therefore face difficulties in integrating themselves professionally, socially and culturally. In the absence of mobility, people with reduced mobility see their mobility even more diminished.

These are the reasons that prompted the PS Group to present this resolution proposal that emphasizes a problem that affects us all because we are all potentially people with reduced mobility and we will all one day face immobility. Therefore, it is essential to take into account the specific characteristics of persons with reduced mobility, motor or brain disabilities, blind or visually impaired persons, the elderly, as well as children, parents with trolleys in sustainable mobility policies and, in particular, in infrastructure planning.

This resolution proposal therefore proposes to make full accessibility:

1 of 1. a recurring topic of the Interministerial Conference on Mobility, Infrastructure and Telecommunications, so that the issue of persons with reduced mobility is systematically integrated into the debates;

2 of 2. to add to the content of the annual report on the performance of public service tasks prepared by SNCB Holding, a chapter dedicated to accessibility and its proper implementation;

3 of 3. SNCB Holding, Infrabel and SNCB submit an annual report to Parliament on the achievements of the previous year in accessibility. In order to do this, SNCB Holding, Infrabel and SNCB would take as the basis the annual report sent to the Minister of Mobility and Public Enterprises as well as to the DGTT.

Beyond the strong symbol that this resolution proposal represents, the PS Group is truly convinced of the absolute need to continue our efforts on accessibility. It is indispensable that this should be a priority for all public transport companies as well as for members of the House of Representatives.

For the PS Group, accessibility goes well beyond improving the conditions of access to mobility for persons with reduced mobility, even though this is already essential. Accessibility must become a powerful guarantee of quality and performance of our public transport for all our fellow citizens. There is still too often to forget that the use of public transportation and, more generally, of the street, is often synonymous with struggles and fighter journey for an increasing number of us.

We have supported and will ⁇ continue to support this goal of accessibility of public transport for all. We are pleased with the progress taken by the file in agreement with the three structures of the SNCB, which are responsible for producing an annual report on this accessibility.

The discussion has already given rise to important contributions. We got acquainted with both the projects of works in the stations and on the quads as well as the projects of accessibility of trains. All this debate was an opportunity to better understand this problem and to tackle it more effectively.

Through the numbers that have been given to us, I want to highlight the delay we took and the slowness of the process. Representatives of the SNCB Holding, owner of the stations, Infrabel and the SNCB operator each told us about their projects and inventories. Currently, only seven of 210 stations are fully accessible to people with reduced mobility. It is extremely little! For the period 2008-2012, a fairly positive effort is promised with 52 stations accessible in 2012. For 2018, we are talking about 100 stations and all of our stations will be accessible only in 2028. As Ms. Burgeon said, then we will all be PMRs!

I am surprised, however, that the figures communicated by Infrabel on the accessibility of quads are different. The accessibility of PMRs to quads would affect 28 stations in 2008, 38 stations in 2012, 50 stations in 2018 and only 100 stations in 2028.

That is why I would like to mark the huge delay taken by our country in railway infrastructure, a very regrettable situation.

In addition, I often ask in the Infrastructure Committee to hold a debate on the structures of the SNCB. Indeed, as the Holding owns the stations and Infrabel owns the quarters, the negotiation is not facilitated, especially since the standards of accessibility for persons with reduced mobility differ in Flanders, Wallonia and Brussels; fortunately, we are now hearing about future common standards.

Our country has therefore taken a serious delay, which requires significant investments, much larger than today, in the transport system.

Similarly, for the accessibility of trains, especially in the Walloon Region, we have suffered a lot from the narrowness of wagon doors with high steps, totally inaccessible to people with difficulty walking.

On the other hand, I would welcome a remarkable human aspect of the SNCB operator; in fact, it is making real efforts to make a large staff available to users in order to facilitate their access to trains. Nevertheless, let’s put ourselves in the place of a disabled person: to get help, she must call the station 24 hours in advance, which is quite dissuasive.

We will therefore support this very positive resolution, but we will continue to insist that, if this measure is part of a relief plan, more funds are injected into the railway infrastructure. We have just talked about the need to encourage rail freight; we should also invest in passenger transport and in accessibility.

Last element: in Walloon Brabant, the Ottignies station, the station that receives the most passengers per day from all of Wallonia, has stalls inaccessible to people with reduced mobility. I would therefore like the criteria of attendance to be taken into account for a priority treatment. This is the case for all stations connected to the RER. On behalf of the RER works, the time to make them accessible is delayed; today, we are talking about 2018, which is difficult to accept by users.

First of all, I would like to thank the reporter for the comprehensive and correct report. It is indeed true, colleagues, that the original text has been substantially modified, because some elements in the text were outdated. I am therefore grateful to the colleagues for unanimously approving the amendment, so that today we have a text that has taken away the unanimity in the committee and is thus broadly ⁇ ined.

During the hearings, we found that there is an enormous amount of goodwill. All members of the committee said during the discussion that accessibility is extremely important. Many questions were asked and many comments were made. Representatives from the various sections of the NMBS also did their best during the hearings to emphasize that accessibility is extremely important to them.

The only thing we found at that time was that some of the proposed deadlines for achieving an accessible environment were quite long. That’s why we considered it important at that time to have an annual debate on accessibility in Parliament. This is how we hold pressure on the boiler. In a world that is becoming increasingly mobile, accessibility is an extremely important aspect. Moving is a basic right.

With this resolution we have placed the focus on public transport. After all, in our society, people are getting older, which is a success, but that also implies that it becomes more difficult to move. For people with disabilities, public transportation is often the only way to move. Not only for those target groups, but, as colleagues have already said, for example, also for mothers or fathers with a buggy, an accessible public transport network is very important.

However, accessible stations should not be the end. What is the importance of an accessible station in an inaccessible environment? It is therefore important that there is a permanent consultation between, for example, the NMBS and the local governments, in order to realize that accessibility.

My colleagues, I will decide. Our proposal for a resolution aims, first, to ensure that what remains of integrated accessibility remains an ever-recurring element at the Interministerial Conference on Mobility, Infrastructure and Telecommunications.

Second, that the annual report of the NMBS Holding contains a chapter on accessibility each time.

Thirdly – and that is the most important thing for me – that parliamentarians receive an annual accessibility report from NMBS Holding, Infrabel and the NMBS Group, with a view to shortening the deadline, in particular 2038, which was pushed forward this year. In the next report, that period should be drastically shortened in order to broaden the perspective on accessibility and to enable the whole to be carried out more broadly.

Therefore, sp.a is pleased that this proposal is on the vote today and we hope that it will be unanimously approved.

The accessibility of public transport for persons with reduced mobility is especially important to us. The SNCB Group has provided a number of efforts in this area. The main train stations were equipped with warning tiles for blind and visually impaired persons, guiding tiles were installed, signage was improved.

Unfortunately, there is still a lot to be done. Thus, as mentioned, the height of the quads is still not standardized. And too few stations are now equipped with mobile access ramps allowing wheelchairs to access trains.

There is also much to do with regard to the accessibility of rolling stock: car doors are too small, as are the corridors between seats. Nothing is also planned to visually disseminate to the attention of hearing-deficient persons information relating to delays, changes or road incident.

Railway station buildings and access to shelters can also be problematic for people with reduced mobility. Mobile access ramps and elevators should be gradually generalized in the main stations, and on all quarters. I think, for example, of the Namur station, where only one quai has sufficient accessibility and meets the "Revalor" standards. This means that if a person with reduced mobility wants to take the train, it must still stop at the right quai.

Let us not lose sight of the fact that people with reduced mobility are regarded as disabled people, but also the elderly, pregnant, the families who drive their children in trolley. Let us also remember that any investment for people with reduced mobility benefits all users.

The resolution proposed to us today was an opportunity to discuss this issue with the various components of the SNCB. The management contract and the planned investment plan convinced us of the willingness to develop positively in this area. It remains to us, and this is the subject of this resolution, and it is also our work as parliamentarians, to closely follow this dossier so that it is respected.

My group and I will vote on this resolution because we want to show that the issue of accessibility of public transport for people with reduced mobility is one of our priorities.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Secretary of State, the Flemish Belang is of course in favour of promoting the accessibility of public transport. Unfortunately, it is still often the case that people with disabilities experience many difficulties to take the train, tram or bus. In addition, there are a number of discouraging procedures that are not an incentive to use public transport. More than ever, the equipment takes into account the limitations of persons with reduced mobility, but there is still a long way to go in this area. So far, a first, general comment.

Second, the draft resolution also shows that the problem is a problem of coordination and division of powers. I note that there is nothing but homogeneous competence packages in terms of mobility. It is quite absurd that Flanders is competent for public city and regional transport, but on the contrary it has nothing to say about railways. This, of course, does not benefit the coordination and promotion of the use of public transport.

I note that this resolution calls for the conclusion of agreements with, among other things, regional authorities and transport companies. I would like to go further and advocate for a complete transfer to Flanders of all powers related to mobility, and thus also the promotion of the accessibility of public transport. I believe that only then can an efficient and integrated mobility policy be achieved. Of course, we have no problem with the spirit of the resolution proposal. In anticipation of these necessary steps, we are of the opinion that the NMBS should ⁇ make additional efforts in this area as well.

People with reduced mobility are often, even more than others, assigned to use public transport. Of course, it is also very important that we make this public transportation accessible to these people as smoothly as possible. In the past, as well as today, this is a problem in many places.

In addition, the current management contracts, which the former Minister of Public Enterprises concluded with the three parts of the railway company, contain a number of concrete measures regarding the accessibility of both the stations, the perrons and the trains for persons with reduced mobility. In addition, this has become a very important focus point in the policy of the public transport company. I think everyone will be able to bear that this was one of the merits of the former minister, Mrs. Inge Vervotte. This work is now continued by Minister Steven Vanackere.

The NMBS Group shall engage in these management agreements to make the necessary efforts, both in terms of assistance in the stations and in terms of adjustments to the infrastructure of both the stations and on the perrons. 2028 may seem like an eternity away, but when you see which infrastructure all needs to be adapted, it is really a very concrete step-by-step plan to make all station buildings accessible to people with reduced mobility. Perrons will also be systematically arranged at standard height so that the boarding and descent of the train can be made easier. In addition, when purchasing new train equipment, special attention will be paid to accessibility for persons with reduced mobility.

The original resolution submitted by the colleagues was still dated for these management contracts. It was therefore only logical – especially after hearing several people from the NMBS – that this text would be adjusted because in the meantime there had been a lot of concrete happening. Of course, not all of today’s troubles can be removed tomorrow. All these plans do not require insignificant investments, both in the short, medium and long term. It is important in these cases to continue to follow this properly.

We ask ourselves a little bit whether a specific parliamentary resolution should be drawn up for this, which in fact can only be sufficiently consulted, that a chapter should be devoted to it in the annual report and that a report should be delivered to the Parliament, but of course we cannot object to that. It is one way to follow it, but Parliament could have done it in a different way, and the resolution may not be so essential in these cases.

However, the idea remains essential that we follow the efforts that have been planned and that are taking place in the coming years, that work is done and that in practice persons with reduced mobility can more easily take the train.