Proposition 54K1868

Proposition de résolution visant à faire du maintien de la capacité du réseau ferroviaire une priorité absolue.

General information ¶

Authors

Ecolo Marcel Cheron
Groen Stefaan Van Hecke

Submission date

May 31, 2016

Official page

Visit

Status

Rejected

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

resolution of parliament public sector public service rail network transport infrastructure transport safety

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

CD&V ∉ Open Vld N-VA LDD MR VB

Voted to reject

Groen Vooruit Ecolo LE PS | SP DéFI PVDA | PTB

Abstained from voting

PP

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 ¶

July 20, 2016 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

I am referring to the written report of this text.

Mr. Speaker, dear colleagues, I would like to thank Mrs. Poncelet for the concisity of her report, in which I saw no fault. It was perfect.

This will allow me to further develop this excellent resolution text which, unfortunately, the majority has found useful and essential to reject. Mrs. De Coninck knows how sad I am still today.

Dear colleagues, the issue of the SNCB has inflamed this parliament on several occasions. We know the problem of the drastic cuts by which this government, to which Mr Miller collaborates, has put SNCB and Infrabel in a very painful situation from a budgetary point of view. But here, the government seems to spend the summer trying to replace Mr. Cornu, who announced his departure at the end of August, but who will probably have to stay a little longer, the government has agreed on a procedure that will take a while longer. We know that the question of governance at the SNCB and Infrabel - the CEO, but also the presidency that a certain party, which I will not designate, seems to look at with much insistence - will occupy us at the entrance.

The question that is raised here is that of the maintenance of capacity both of the SNCB and of Infrabel. The attractiveness of the rail depends on its reliability and safety, which requires regular maintenance. I’ll give you two numbers, my group leader is a big fan of numbers, and sometimes letters. On average, 23% of its trains are permanently unavailable due to failure or maintenance.

This phenomenon itself is at the basis of one-third of the delays. But the most long-term concern is the state of the network, renewal, maintenance and accumulated delay in capacity maintenance, ⁇ in the south of the country.

Studies from both the company Technum and the Polytechnic School of Lausanne announce, with unchanged policy, a techno-economic breakdown that will make the southern network of the country, in particular, unstable, but that will also impact the entire network in terms of sustainability. Since 2011, this finding has probably and significantly worsened, given the successive budget cuts.

The position on capacity maintenance should be the priority in terms of investment. It should be subject to a rigorous and systematic analysis with a comprehensive study of the state of the network and a public report on the state of the infrastructure. In fact, ⁇ ining the capacity of the network means ensuring that technical infrastructures, roads, track devices, works of art, catenaires, substations, signalling benefit from sufficient investments.

It is in this perspective that two positions can be distinguished, namely, on the one hand, the one relating to the maintenance of capacity or the renewal that defines the operations of replacement of elements; on the other hand, the one relating to maintenance, monitoring and current maintenance.

At present, our network is generally in poor condition. It is estimated, for example, that one mile of track in four will have to be replaced as well as 225 000 crossings.

I cited the École Polytechnique de Lausanne, because it was the audit that was commissioned by Infrabel to this latter in 2011 that highlighted this significant delay in terms of renewal of infrastructure. In 2013, the Technum office estimated the delay in renewal to 650 million euros.

In this way, colleagues, we can multiply the data that we have and that we could still benefit from. But it would insult your understanding ability to estimate that advocacy is not enough. It is enough!

Without a massive reinvestment in capacity maintenance, it is not only the security of the network that will be threatened but it is also reliability: transport times for passengers and rail efficiency in a concern for modal transfer from the car to the rail that we want and demand.

If renewal budgets in the new Multiannual Investment Plan (MIP) are not defined through both management contracts and choices made by the railway investment cell, the state of the infrastructure will continue to be worrying and, given the network structure, the delays will affect the whole.

This is, dear colleagues, the reason why I wished that the whole Chamber and therefore the plenary session could be informed of this debate on the capacity and maintenance of capacity of the railway in this country.

Certainly, it would be very surprising that the majority groups have taken advantage of these few beautiful days that separate us from the committee and the vote that took place and which rejected this text and the plenary session.

But, Mrs. De Coninck, with others I think that a certain remorse occupies the ranks of the majority and it is therefore with this willingness to point out the issues beyond the issues of governance that occupy you too much for the moment, the problems of underfinancing that occupied you from the beginning of the legislature, that the debate is about ⁇ ining the capacity of the investment necessary for the investment in what? In the capacity of our network to be at the height on the day it will want to operate concretely for the travellers and for the users this necessary and vital modal transfer.

My colleague Vanden Burre has again highlighted here in the House the considerable economic cost that the inaction of this government entails in transfers to the train, to the users and to the “customer service”, as says Mr. Cornu who is on departure. Dear colleagues, you have a few hours to change this state of mind. I hope that soon you will create the surprise by supporting this text. You would thus make sure that this rejection in committee turns into an adoption in plenary.