Cornerstones for the European Parliament election
By Back on Track / Stay Grounded
Deadline for this is met, and contributions are coming in, and will be sorted and published on this website country by country. Also a non-country party has contributed.
We will aim for a press release, and the presentation page will start with a small subtract from this and a link to the full version.
Back on Track and Stay Grounded work for better cross‐border rail connections instead of an ongoing growth of flights. To inform the voters at the coming European Parliament election we are asking the same questions to all parties across Europe about flying, trains and the climate change challenge.
The country list will come here in alphabetic order. You may open the answers in a separate window so you can refer to the questions mentioned below.
Austria: FPÖ English language; FPÖ German language; Grüne English language; Grüne German language; JETZT English language; JETZT German language; NEOS English language; NEOS German language; ÖVP English language; ÖVP German language; SPÖ English language; SPÖ German language
Germany: Die Grünen English language; Die Grünen German language; CDU-CSU English language; CDU-CSU German language; Die Linke English language; Die Linke German language; FDP English language; FDP German language; SPD English language; SPD German language
Pan-European parties: Volt Europe English language
This is our original questions to all the parties:
- 1: Since air travel is the most climate harming form of transport, what do you propose in order to make more people use trains instead of planes for trips up to 1000 km in the EU and which role should night trains play in this concern?
- 2: What will you do in order to level the playing field between the different modes of long-distance travel or would you even give stronger support to the more climate friendly modes of transport – and how?
- 3: How do you judge the success of the hitherto existing EU-policy of liberalization of the rail market as the way to achieve good national and cross-border train connections? Do you support this policy or would do you plan to introduce an alternative?
- 4: There are ideas for a Europe wide interconnected day and night train cross-border network (e.g. the “LunaLiner”) as an alternative to short and mid distance flights. What do you think about these plans, and if you support them what would you do in order to implement this?
- 5: The European Court of Auditors calls the European high-speed rail network an “ineffective patchwork” that does not lead to good connections on the EU level (see report No 19 from the European Court of Auditors). What do you plan in order to improve this situation?
- 6: Recently EU rail passenger rights were under debate. What is your position concerning the future of passenger rights in rail and other modes of public transport? This particularly concerns cross-border services and a journey chain involving two or more operators? Should operators be able to refuse compensation if a service is cancelled or severely delayed because of “exceptional circumstances” and, if so, how should “exceptional circumstances” be defined?
- 7: What is your position on a kerosene tax, either EU‐wide or between EU member states? And if you support it: What will you do in order to get it implemented?
- 7.1: Would you support a general ban on short distance flight in the EU? If yes: Which should be the minimum distance to allow flights? If no: Which other measures to limit short distance flights do you plan to implement?
- 7.2: Since the new international agreement CORSIA (Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation) and the EU-ETS (Emissions Trading Scheme) are not sufficient to tackle aviation emissions, what other measures do you envisage in order to regulate aviation (e.g. a tax on kerosene, tickets, VAT; a frequent flyer levy; a moratorium on airport infrastructure expansion; a ban of certain flights, e.g. short haul flights, …)?