[ad_1]
The FRP parliamentary group decided on Wednesday that the party will ask the Supreme Court to investigate how much energy the fourth EU rail package will pass to the EU. Labor agrees to the lawsuit. Therefore, you get the most.
FRP leader Siv Jensen and her party contribute to the fact that there will be a majority to send rail package 4 to the Supreme Court. Photo: Ketil Blom Haugstulen
On Wednesday, the FRP parliamentary group decided to support a SV proposal for rail package four. The proposal is to let the Supreme Court decide whether the Storting can give the EU as much power as the proposal implies.
Shortly after the FRP decision, the Labor Party announced that they also want the Supreme Court to investigate the matter.
Thus, the Storting ends up putting an end to the government’s wish for Norway to say yes to the fourth EU railway package as the proposal stands now.
– This shows that the fight SV has waged against the sale of Norwegian railways is really useful. This case is winnable, the Norwegian railways must belong to the Norwegian people. We are happy that the rest of the opposition agrees with us on that, says SV leader Audun Lysbakken.
The railway package tries, among other things, to simplify and harmonize processes. An example could be the introduction of the same standards and requirements for rail in European countries. But the package also tries to transfer power to the EU.
Take the case to the Supreme Court
– We will now ask the Supreme Court to investigate how much power this package transfers to the EU. Now that a debate has arisen around this, we want to take the opportunity of Article 83 of the Constitution to ask the Supreme Court about this. Frp emphasizes that we will continue to work for competition in the railway, says transport policy spokesman Bård Hoksrud (Frp) in a press release.
APS transportation policy spokesperson Sverre Myrli stated after the FRP group meeting that they had also come to the same conclusion:
– We have talked about this in the group and we agree with the others. Then it will be so, he says.
Rødt, MDG, SV, Sp and Ap made it clear early on that they do not agree with the political course the package entails. Sp, SV and Rødt have also been very skeptical about the legal basis for transferring more power to the EU.
The Norwegian rail network is physically connected to the rest of Europe. The EU rail package will also link the organization of rail operations more closely with the rest of the continent. Photo: Stein J. Bjørge
Legal dispute
Aftenposten has highlighted the legal disagreement over the case in articles and discussion posts. Part of the disagreement is over whether the Storting has a legal basis in the Constitution to say yes to the government’s proposal.
SV agrees with legal experience that it believes it would be contrary to the Constitution to incorporate the EU rail package into Norwegian law. The Government believes that this is not the case and is based on assessments by the legal department of the Ministry of Justice.
The dispute revolves around whether it can be considered “discreet” or not to leave some decisions to the EU railway agency. If it is “non-intrusive”, the Storting can say yes to the proposal on the basis of article 26 of the Constitution.
If it’s more than “low-key,” lawyers point out that the Storting lacks the authority in the Constitution to say yes.
It is this legal dispute that the Supreme Court will now rule on.
also read
Professor believes Minister Hareide misleads the Storting about the EU’s influence on Norwegian rail policy
It will mean that decisions are passed on to the EU Rail Agency
The fourth rail package was adopted in the EU in 2016. The Government has asked the Storting for approval to incorporate the entire package into the EEA agreement and thus into Norwegian law.
As Aftenposten mentioned, the content of the case that the Storting now has on its table is twofold.
- It contains more stringent requirements for competitive bidding for the train supply.
- At the same time, the EU railway agency ERA is gaining more power than before.
FRP has no problem with the first point, but with the second.
Norway is not a member of the EU. Therefore, we do not obtain any voting rights in the agency.
It is essential that Norway has the last word
– We are sure of a common European regulatory framework for the purchase and approval of materials. This will make it cheaper and easier to ensure good competition, also across national borders, Hoksrud says.
But he emphasizes that for Frp it is “crucial that in Norway we have the last word, both in terms of safety and general activity on our railways.” Hoksrud says.
– FRP has worked for many years and will continue to work for the competition in the railway, he emphasizes.
As far as Aftenposten knows, there is internal disagreement over the case at Frp. In recent years, incipient skepticism has developed both towards the EEA agreement and towards EU membership in the party. In the last adopted parliamentary program, the FRP is for the first time against Norway becoming a member of the EU.
