At the present it is talked about a posible Spanish railway network privatization. What is the attitude of the CCOO Union about this?
Our attitude is a forthright oposition. Not only because of ideologic reasons, but because of practical reasons because we have a nearly and complete knowledge of the privatization and regulation experience in the United Kingdom, an experience that mainly has had an impact on the workers and on the railway service too. A few days ago it was published on the British press how the record of a million of complaints of the customers has been passed and the facts proved that, far from reach a saving -perhaps it was the objective- the British Government grants for the present private operators are the double of the ones that it given to British Airways. We think that it is a social experiment that has failed and we do not want be the victims if this experiment in Spain. In this way, the position of Comisiones Obreras Union and the other organnizations is very clear.
But, have you think some strategies and concrete actions to respond this situation?
Of course at the present we are waiting for, because the key of the privatization is the segregation of the railway substructures. The railways, economically, are, in some cases, unprofitable bussines, because of the cost of the railway substructure in the services. The fact that happends if the railway operation is separated from the substructure according with the liberal idea is that the transport operator companies appears as profitable ones and capables of being privatizated. In consecuence, we have got the arms grinded against whatever posibility of segregation of the railway substructure operation, I mean, against the creation of a railway substructure entity separated from the rest of the operators, bacause it would mean the increasement of the liberatization, privatization, non-regularize, falling of the railway as we know it.
The sector annalists have notice a kind of war between the Substructure Operator Entity (GIF) and Renfe. What is the opinion of CCOO about this situation?
We have denounce the creation of the Railway substructure operator public entity for some functions that Renfe is able to do. We were against the way of create this entity, because it is done in the most undemocratic way, using the proceeding of the Accompaniment Law, and through a modification in the Senate. I think that there is a clear undemocratic deficit and a desire of hiding what is behind the GIF. I think that in this way it is hidden a proposal of separation of the substructure. The GIF has had the same behaviour of a predator that, in the beggining was created with the only sense of the Madrid-Barcelona building and recently has taken possession of the building procedures of the variant line Madrid-Valladolid and it is known the operation that has been proposed in the railway sphere, a clear blackmailing operation from the Substructure Ministry to Renfe to leave the operation and management of the Madrid-Sevilla line to included it in the GIF.
I think that the GIF and the State Secretary, Alberto Vilalta want to do the germ of a railway substructure manager entity, but we think that it was harmful for the railway future. About this, we have already ask the Substructure Minister for a meeting with us to speak about our proposals and our refusing to the creation of a entity with these characteristics and if there is a segregation, conscious of what would be the consecuences for the spanish railwaymen, for sure we would convoke some mobilizations not only of the Unions but social mobilizations. I think that the society has de right and the obligation of knowing what is the railway model that is behind the GIF and the segregation of the substructure management and the railway disputes would have some rates non-known from the transition time, because the railwaymen know that we are talking about our future.
In your opinion, what is the direction where the network management model is going to?
We think the it is possible that other operators different that Renfe will appear, private operators. I think that the putting in service of the "Puerto seco de Coslada" and the possibility that commuter trains different than the Renfe ones can work or the existence of international railway groups, etc., etc. are going to make possible the access of other operators. In this situation, we ask for a suitable presence of Renfe in this new liberalization sphere and this must be a strong presence. We think that about the public services the management must be done by Renfe. In the present situation it must be included in the concept from the regional and commuter trains to some large distance lines. I think that to integrate a railway commercial sense it is not necesary to privatize it as has been demonstrated by Renfe, entity in which there are two cultures: the one of attending to the users and to satisfying the customers. In this sense and to say it in some way, the market forces are already included in the Renfe filosofy. The workers are conscious of it, but we are not going to go back to positions that limit the public role in the railway world.
With a clear connection with the burning railway present, in this moment the railway future is in relation with the creation of new High Velocity lines and the controversy about it. How does the Union evaluate the situation?
I think that there is a false controversy in the High Velocity, that is inherited from the particular way of application of the High Velocity in our country, that has been done with a different wide than the network one. All the tendences are that the railway must create different strategies about the passengers transport, but they must be complementary. In this way, the train services must be done with a high quality and must be included in all the network. To do this, it is necesary to make compatible, from the technnical point of view, the train that I would name "high feature ones" circulation both on the new lines and the improved ones and using different systems, as it could be the pendulum one. I think that we are prisoners of the way of the railway development and of the electoral time because it seems that all the people wants to sell an AVE train to his town. I think that the velocity as a myth must be abandoned and think about the time of the travel and the quality as a parameter that permit the railway to win an important space to the private car or to the plane. This is a false and interested controversy because it is in relation with the GIF expansión projects, all people knows that the GIF has interest in creating a little High Velocity network operated by him as a germ of that authority in railway substructures.
About the inmediate projects of the railway transport What would be the priorities?
Our present priority, speaking as a Union, is the the north variant was built and with Renfe rail wide. I think that this is a State bet and it is the first of our aspirations. In this sense we want to remark that the development of this work is the main priority and after the recent report of Renfe there are not excuses to not to make the budget and to work in the year 2000 in this North variant, because it is the only opportunity for the North-Est railway to survive.
Go
back to the Interview main page