Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-01-17-Speech-2-049"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech⁶
dcterms:Date	"2006-01-17"^^xsd:date⁶
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Juurdepääs sadamateenuste turule⁶
dcterms:Language	"en"^^xsd:language⁶
lpv:document identification number	"en.20060117.5.2-049"⁶
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2006-01-17-Speech-2-050⁶
lpv:speaker	lp:Richard Howitt⁶
lpv:spoken text	"Mr President, when the European Parliament threw out the proposed port services directive two years ago no one believed that the Commission would try to bring it back. Yet it did not consult, it would not listen and it decided to ignore this democratic parliament. Let us be very clear about the damage that this law, if adopted, would inflict on ports, including the east coast ports which I represent in this Parliament. Replacing highly skilled, trained staff with ships’ crew able to load and unload is a recipe for accidents, injury and, possibly, deaths. Compare that with the port of Tilbury, which achieved a 50% reduction in accidents in 2005, or Great Yarmouth, which has seen no reportable accidents for two years. I want to say to Mr Jarzembowski that this law would be devastating for jobs. Port owners tell me that over 600 new jobs at Felixstowe and over 750 new jobs at Harwich would all be threatened. Not one of 650 jobs at the port of Tilbury would be safe. That is what the port owners say themselves and these port owners would see their incentive for vital new investments destroyed. Already two new investment projects at Tilbury have been put on hold because of the uncertainty created by this directive. Port expansion at Bathside Bay, so recently approved at Harwich, and the positive decision we very much hope for this week for the Felixstowe South expansion, are both in jeopardy. I would say to the UK Independence Party, that represents GBP 1 billion of expenditure, if you check your figures; and we would not even have to be here now but for the fact that your members voted for this legislation in the Committee on Transport and Tourism. On investment again, in Great Yarmouth a campaign for more than a decade to build an outer harbour would see this put in competition with the existing inner harbour, substituting existing jobs rather than expanding jobs and services in an area recognised as a priority to tackle unemployment in the whole of the European Union. Make no mistake, it is skilled dock workers who would suffer most – people like Steven Drew from Yarmouth, sitting in the Public Gallery listening to this debate, who, together with his father Frank before him, have given 55 years’ combined service to the ports industry. Competition is needed between ports, not within them. The European Union should now do what it should have done before: consult ports, trade unions and shipping lines from scratch, starting with a blank sheet of paper, and on this proposal it should admit defeat. This European Parliament, having sought to reject this proposal once and for all, should now vote ‘no’ for a second time and never again."@en⁴
lpv:spokenAs	member; PES (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)²² member; Delegation to the EU-Turkey Joint Parliamentary Committee (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)²² member; AFET (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)²² vice-chair; DROI (2004-09-01--2007-01-14)²² unknown; Labour Party (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)²² substitute; Delegation to the EU-Russia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)²² substitute; EMPL (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)²²
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, when the European Parliament threw out the proposed port services directive two years ago no one believed that the Commission would try to bring it back. Yet it did not consult, it would not listen and it decided to ignore this democratic parliament. Let us be very clear about the damage that this law, if adopted, would inflict on ports, including the east coast ports which I represent in this Parliament. Replacing highly skilled, trained staff with ships’ crew able to load and unload is a recipe for accidents, injury and, possibly, deaths. Compare that with the port of Tilbury, which achieved a 50% reduction in accidents in 2005, or Great Yarmouth, which has seen no reportable accidents for two years. I want to say to Mr Jarzembowski that this law would be devastating for jobs. Port owners tell me that over 600 new jobs at Felixstowe and over 750 new jobs at Harwich would all be threatened. Not one of 650 jobs at the port of Tilbury would be safe. That is what the port owners say themselves and these port owners would see their incentive for vital new investments destroyed. Already two new investment projects at Tilbury have been put on hold because of the uncertainty created by this directive. Port expansion at Bathside Bay, so recently approved at Harwich, and the positive decision we very much hope for this week for the Felixstowe South expansion, are both in jeopardy. I would say to the UK Independence Party, that represents GBP 1 billion of expenditure, if you check your figures; and we would not even have to be here now but for the fact that your members voted for this legislation in the Committee on Transport and Tourism. On investment again, in Great Yarmouth a campaign for more than a decade to build an outer harbour would see this put in competition with the existing inner harbour, substituting existing jobs rather than expanding jobs and services in an area recognised as a priority to tackle unemployment in the whole of the European Union. Make no mistake, it is skilled dock workers who would suffer most – people like Steven Drew from Yarmouth, sitting in the Public Gallery listening to this debate, who, together with his father Frank before him, have given 55 years’ combined service to the ports industry. Competition is needed between ports, not within them. The European Union should now do what it should have done before: consult ports, trade unions and shipping lines from scratch, starting with a blank sheet of paper, and on this proposal it should admit defeat. This European Parliament, having sought to reject this proposal once and for all, should now vote ‘no’ for a second time and never again."@cs¹ "Hr. formand, da Europa-Parlamentet smed forslaget til direktiv om havnetjenester ud for to år siden, troede ingen, at Kommissionen ville forsøge at komme med det igen. Men den ville ikke høre, ville ikke lytte og besluttede at ignorere dette demokratiske parlament. Vi skal være klar over den skade, som dette direktiv, hvis det vedtages, vil påføre havnene, herunder de havne langs østkysten, som jeg repræsenterer her i Parlamentet. Udskiftningen af dygtige og højt uddannede medarbejdere med skibsbesætninger, der kan laste og losse, er den sikre vej til ulykker, kvæstelser og muligvis dødsfald. Sammenlign dette med havnen i Tilbury, som har opnået en halvering af ulykkerne i 2005, eller Great Yarmouth, hvor der ikke har været indberetningspligtige ulykker i to år. Jeg vil sige til hr. Jarzembowski, at dette direktiv kan være ødelæggende for arbejdspladserne. Havneejerne fortæller mig, at over 600 nye arbejdspladser i Felixstowe og mere end 750 nye arbejdspladser i Harwich vil blive truet. Ikke én af de 650 arbejdspladser i Tilbury ville være sikre. Det siger havneejerne selv, og disse havneejere ville få deres incitamenter til vigtige nyinvesteringer ødelagt. To nye investeringsprojekter i Tilbury er allerede sat i venteposition på grund af den usikkerhed, som direktivet har medført. Havneudvidelsen i Bathside Bay, som for nylig blev godkendt i Harwich, og den positive beslutning, vi håber meget på i denne uge vedrørende syd-udvidelsen i Felixstowe South, er begge i fare. Jeg vil sige til Det Forenede Kongeriges Uafhængighedsparti, at det udgør udgifter på 1 milliarder britiske pund, hvis man kontrollerer tallene; og vi ville slet ikke sidde her nu, hvis det ikke var, fordi Deres medlemmer stemte for denne lovgivning i Udvalget om Transport og Turisme. Tilbage til investeringerne vil kampagnen i Great Yarmouth gennem mere end 10 år for at få bygget en yderhavn betyde, at den ville skulle konkurrere med den nuværende inderhavn og træde i stedet for eksisterende arbejdspladser i stedet for at udbygge arbejdspladser og tjenester på et område, der anerkendes om et prioriteret område i forbindelse med bekæmpelse af arbejdsløshed i hele EU. Tag ikke fejl, det er de faglærte havnearbejdere, der vil lide mest - folk som Steven Drew fra Yarmouth, der sidder på tilhørerpladserne og lytter til denne forhandling, som sammen med sin far Frank før ham har givet i alt 55 års tjeneste til havnene. Der er brug for konkurrence mellem havnene, ikke inden for de enkelte havne. Nu bør EU gøre, hvad det skulle have gjort tidligere: rådføre sig med havne, fagforeninger og rederier helt fra bunden, starte helt forfra og erkende nederlaget med dette forslag. Europa-Parlamentet har forsøgt at forkaste forslaget en gang for alle og bør stemme "nej" for anden gang og så aldrig mere."@da² "Herr Präsident! Als das Europäische Parlament die vorgeschlagene Hafendienstrichtlinie vor zwei Jahren ablehnte, hätte niemand es für möglich gehalten, dass die Kommission sie erneut vorlegen würde. Dennoch hat sie niemanden gefragt, sie hat nicht zugehört, und sie hat beschlossen, dieses demokratisch gewählte Parlament zu ignorieren. Wir müssen uns des Schadens ganz klar bewusst sein, den diese Regelung - sollte sie angenommen werden - für Häfen, einschließlich der von mir in diesem Parlament vertretenen Häfen an der Ostküste, mit sich bringen würde. Ersetzt man hoch qualifizierte Arbeitskräfte durch die Schiffsmannschaften, dann werden Unfälle, Verletzungen und möglicherweise Todesfälle beim Be- und Entladen nicht lange auf sich warten lassen. Vergleichen Sie das mit dem Hafen von Tilbury, der 2005 eine Senkung der Unfallrate um 50 % verzeichnen konnte, oder von Great Yarmouth, wo es seit zwei Jahren keine meldepflichtigen Unfälle mehr gab. Herrn Jarzembowski möchte ich nur sagen, dass diese Regelung katastrophale Folgen für die Arbeitsplätze hätte. Von den Hafeneigentümern habe ich erfahren, dass über 600 neue Arbeitsplätze in Felixstowe und über 750 neue Arbeitsplätze in Harwich gefährdet wären. Nicht einer der 650 Arbeitsplätze im Hafen von Tilbury wäre sicher. Das sagen die Hafeneigentümer selbst, und diese Hafeneigentümer würden jeden Anreiz für wichtige Neuinvestitionen verlieren. Schon jetzt wurden zwei neue Investitionsvorhaben in Tilbury wegen der durch diese Richtlinie verursachten Unsicherheit auf Eis gelegt. Sowohl der unlängst in Harwich gebilligte Hafenausbau in Bathside Bay wie auch die Erweiterung des südlichen Teils des Hafens von Felixstowe, für die wir uns in dieser Woche eine positive Entscheidung erhoffen, sind gefährdet. Der UK Independence Party möchte ich sagen, dass das Ausgaben in Höhe von einer Milliarde britischen Pfund repräsentiert – vielleicht sollten Sie sich die Zahlen nochmals genau anschauen -, und wir müssten uns heute nicht damit befassen, wenn Ihre Abgeordneten nicht im Ausschuss für Verkehr und Fremdenverkehr für diese Regelung gestimmt hätten. Nochmals zu den Investitionen. In Great Yarmouth läuft seit mehr als einem Jahrzehnt eine Kampagne zum Bau eines Außenhafens, der durch diese Regelung in Konkurrenz zum Innenhafen treten würde. Das würde zu einer Substitution von Arbeitsplätzen anstatt zu zusätzlichen Arbeitsplätzen und Dienstleistungen in einer Region mit einer Arbeitslosenquote führen, die zu den höchsten in der Europäischen Union zählt und deshalb vorrangig bekämpft werden muss. Eines ist klar, die wirklich Leidtragenden werden die qualifizierten Hafenarbeiter sein – Menschen wie Steven Drew aus Yarmouth, der heute von der Besuchertribüne aus diese Aussprache verfolgt und der zusammen mit seinem Vater insgesamt 55 Jahre lang in der Hafenwirtschaft tätig war. Wir brauchen Wettbewerb zwischen und nicht innerhalb der Häfen. Die Europäische Union sollte jetzt das tun, was sie bereits hätte tun sollen: Sie sollte ganz von vorn beginnen und von Anfang an Häfen, Gewerkschaften und Schifffahrtslinien konsultieren, und, was diesen Vorschlag betrifft, sollte sie sich geschlagen geben. Nachdem sich das Europäische Parlament um eine endgültige Ablehnung dieses Vorschlags bemüht hat, sollte es zum zweiten und letzten Mal mit „Nein“ stimmen."@de⁹ "Κύριε Πρόεδρε, όταν το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο απέρριψε πριν από δύο χρόνια την πρόταση οδηγίας για τις λιμενικές υπηρεσίες κανείς δεν πίστευε ότι η Επιτροπή θα προσπαθούσε να την επαναφέρει. Ωστόσο, δεν συμβουλεύτηκε, δεν άκουσε και αποφάσισε να αγνοήσει αυτό το δημοκρατικό κοινοβούλιο. Πρέπει να είμαστε απολύτως σαφείς όσον αφορά τη ζημία που θα επιφέρει αυτός ο νόμος, εφόσον εγκριθεί, στους λιμένες, περιλαμβανομένων των λιμένων της ανατολικής ακτής την οποία εκπροσωπώ σε αυτό το Κοινοβούλιο. Η αντικατάσταση εκπαιδευμένου προσωπικού υψηλής ειδίκευσης με πληρώματα πλοίων τα οποία θα μπορούν να φορτώνουν και να εκφορτώνουν αποτελεί συνταγή για ατυχήματα, τραυματισμούς και, πιθανώς, θανάτους. Συγκρίνετέ το αυτό με τον λιμένα του Tilbury, ο οποίος πέτυχε 50% μείωση των ατυχημάτων το 2005, ή το Great Yarmouth, όπου δεν έχουν αναφερθεί σοβαρά ατυχήματα εδώ και δύο χρόνια. Θέλω να πω στον κ. Jarzembowski ότι αυτός ο νόμος θα ήταν καταστροφικός για τις θέσεις εργασίας. Οι ιδιοκτήτες των λιμένων με ενημερώνουν ότι θα απειληθούν περισσότερες από 600 νέες θέσεις εργασίας στο Felixstowe και περισσότερες από 750 νέες θέσεις εργασίας στο Harwich. Ούτε μία από τις 650 θέσεις εργασίας στο Tilbury δεν θα είναι ασφαλής. Αυτό δηλώνουν οι ίδιοι οι ιδιοκτήτες των λιμένων και αυτοί οι ιδιοκτήτες των λιμένων θα δουν τα κίνητρά τους για νέες επενδύσεις ζωτικής σημασίας να καταστρέφονται. Ήδη δύο νέα σχέδια επενδύσεων στο Tilbury έχουν αναβληθεί λόγω της αβεβαιότητας που δημιουργεί αυτή η οδηγία. Η επέκταση του λιμένα στον κόλπο του Bathside, η οποία εγκρίθηκε προσφάτως στο Harwich, και η θετική απόφαση την οποία αναμένουμε τόσο πολύ αυτήν την εβδομάδα για την επέκταση στο Felixstowe South, βρίσκονται και οι δύο σε κίνδυνο. Θα έλεγα στο Κόμμα Ανεξαρτησίας του Ηνωμένου Βασιλείου ότι αυτό αντιστοιχεί σε δαπάνη 1 δισ. λιρών Αγγλίας, εάν ελέγξετε τα στοιχεία σας· και δεν θα ήμασταν καν υποχρεωμένοι να βρισκόμαστε εδώ τώρα, εάν οι βουλευτές σας δεν είχαν υπερψηφίσει αυτήν τη νομοθεσία στην Επιτροπή Μεταφορών και Τουρισμού. Όσον αφορά και πάλι τις επενδύσεις, στο Great Yarmouth μια εκστρατεία, η οποία διήρκεσε περισσότερο από μία δεκαετία, για την κατασκευή εξωτερικού λιμένα θα θεωρηθεί ότι λειτουργεί ανταγωνιστικά προς τον υφιστάμενο εσωτερικό λιμένα, αντικαθιστώντας τις υφιστάμενες θέσεις εργασίας αντί να αναπτύσσει νέες θέσεις εργασίας και υπηρεσίες σε έναν τομέα ο οποίος αναγνωρίζεται ως τομέας προτεραιότητας για την αντιμετώπιση της ανεργίας σε ολόκληρη την Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση. Μην έχετε την παραμικρή αμφιβολία ότι αυτοί που θα υποφέρουν περισσότερο θα είναι οι ειδικευμένοι λιμενεργάτες – άνθρωποι όπως ο Steven Drew από το Yarmouth, ο οποίος βρίσκεται στα θεωρεία του κοινού και παρακολουθεί αυτήν τη συζήτηση και ο οποίος, μαζί με τον πατέρα του Frank πριν από αυτόν, έχουν προσφέρει συνολικά 55 έτη υπηρεσίας στον λιμενικό τομέα. Ο ανταγωνισμός είναι απαραίτητος μεταξύ των λιμένων, όχι εντός των λιμένων. Η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση πρέπει τώρα να πράξει αυτό που έπρεπε να είχε πράξει προηγουμένως: να συμβουλευτεί εξαρχής τους λιμένες, τα σωματεία και τις ναυτιλιακές γραμμές, αρχίζοντας εκ του μηδενός, ενώ όσον αφορά την προκειμένη πρόταση οφείλει να αποδεχτεί την ήττα της. Το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο, προκειμένου να απορρίψει αυτήν την πρόταση άπαξ διά παντός, πρέπει τώρα να ψηφίσει «όχι» για δεύτερη και τελευταία φορά."@el¹⁰ "Señor Presidente, cuando el Parlamento Europeo rechazó la propuesta de directiva de servicios portuarios hace dos años, nadie pensaba que la Comisión volvería a presentarla. Sin embargo, ni nos ha consultado ni nos ha escuchado, sino que ha decidido hacer caso omiso de este Parlamento democrático. Debe quedar muy claro el perjuicio que esta norma, si se aprobara, causaría a los puertos, incluidos los de la costa Este que yo represento en este Parlamento. Sustituir una mano de obra cualificada y experimentada por personal de marinería al que se permite cargar y descargar es la mejor fórmula para que haya accidentes, lesiones e incluso muertes. Compárese esa situación con la del puerto de Tilbury, que ha logrado reducir los accidentes un 50 % en 2005, o Great Yarmouth, que lleva dos años sin registrar ningún accidente de notificación obligatoria. Quiero decir al señor Jarzembowski que esta ley sería desastrosa para el empleo. Los propietarios de los puertos me han dicho que estarían en peligro más de 600 nuevos puestos de trabajo en Felixstowe y más de 750 en Harwich. Ninguno de los 650 puestos del puerto de Tilbury estaría seguro. Esas son las palabras de los propios titulares de los puertos, quienes además verían desaparecer sus incentivos para realizar nuevas inversiones indispensables. Dos nuevos proyectos de inversión en Tilbury ya han sido congelados debido a la incertidumbre generada por esta directiva. Tanto la expansión portuaria en la bahía de Bathside, recientemente aprobada en Harwich, como la decisión positiva que esperamos ansiosamente esta semana para la expansión del Felixstowe hacia el sur, están en peligro. Recuerdo al Partido por la Independencia del Reino Unido que todo ello representa un gasto de mil millones de libras esterlinas, si se examinan las cifras, y que ahora mismo no estaríamos en este trance si no fuera porque sus diputados votaron a favor de esta directiva en la Comisión de Transportes y Turismo. Volviendo a las inversiones, hace más de diez años que se defiende la construcción de un puerto exterior en Great Yarmouth, que entraría en competencia con el actual puerto interior, con lo que se sustituirían puestos de trabajo existentes en vez de aumentarlos y de ampliar los servicios en una zona considerada prioritaria para abordar el desempleo en toda la Unión Europea. No se equivoquen: son los estibadores portuarios cualificados los que más sufrirían, personas como Steven Drew, de Yarmouth, que se encuentra en la galería pública escuchando este debate: entre él y su padre, Frank, antes que él, llevan juntos más de cincuenta y cinco años prestando servicio en este sector. La competencia entre puertos es necesaria, pero no dentro de los puertos. La Unión Europea debe hacer ahora lo que debió haber hecho antes: consultar antes que nada a los puertos, a los sindicatos y a las compañías navieras, comenzar con una hoja en blanco y admitir su derrota en esta propuesta. Este Parlamento Europeo, habiendo rechazado ya la propuesta de una vez por todas, debe votar «no» una segunda vez y para siempre."@es²⁰ "Mr President, when the European Parliament threw out the proposed port services directive two years ago no one believed that the Commission would try to bring it back. Yet it did not consult, it would not listen and it decided to ignore this democratic parliament. Let us be very clear about the damage that this law, if adopted, would inflict on ports, including the east coast ports which I represent in this Parliament. Replacing highly skilled, trained staff with ships’ crew able to load and unload is a recipe for accidents, injury and, possibly, deaths. Compare that with the port of Tilbury, which achieved a 50% reduction in accidents in 2005, or Great Yarmouth, which has seen no reportable accidents for two years. I want to say to Mr Jarzembowski that this law would be devastating for jobs. Port owners tell me that over 600 new jobs at Felixstowe and over 750 new jobs at Harwich would all be threatened. Not one of 650 jobs at the port of Tilbury would be safe. That is what the port owners say themselves and these port owners would see their incentive for vital new investments destroyed. Already two new investment projects at Tilbury have been put on hold because of the uncertainty created by this directive. Port expansion at Bathside Bay, so recently approved at Harwich, and the positive decision we very much hope for this week for the Felixstowe South expansion, are both in jeopardy. I would say to the UK Independence Party, that represents GBP 1 billion of expenditure, if you check your figures; and we would not even have to be here now but for the fact that your members voted for this legislation in the Committee on Transport and Tourism. On investment again, in Great Yarmouth a campaign for more than a decade to build an outer harbour would see this put in competition with the existing inner harbour, substituting existing jobs rather than expanding jobs and services in an area recognised as a priority to tackle unemployment in the whole of the European Union. Make no mistake, it is skilled dock workers who would suffer most – people like Steven Drew from Yarmouth, sitting in the Public Gallery listening to this debate, who, together with his father Frank before him, have given 55 years’ combined service to the ports industry. Competition is needed between ports, not within them. The European Union should now do what it should have done before: consult ports, trade unions and shipping lines from scratch, starting with a blank sheet of paper, and on this proposal it should admit defeat. This European Parliament, having sought to reject this proposal once and for all, should now vote ‘no’ for a second time and never again."@et⁵ "Arvoisa puhemies, kun Euroopan parlamentti kaksi vuotta sitten hylkäsi ehdotetun satamadirektiivin, kukaan ei uskonut, että komissio yrittäisi tuoda sen takaisin. Komissio ei kuitenkaan järjestänyt kuulemista eikä kuunnellut vaan päätti sivuuttaa demokraattisen parlamentin. On tehtävä selväksi, että jos säädös hyväksytään, siitä aiheutuu vahinkoa satamille, myös itärannikon satamille, joita edustan Euroopan parlamentissa. Jos rahtia lastaavat ja purkavat erittäin ammattitaitoisten, koulutettujen työntekijöiden sijasta alusten omat miehistöt, tapahtuu varmasti onnettomuuksia, loukkaantumisia ja mahdollisesti jopa kuolemia. Verratkaapa tilannetta Tilburyn satamaan, jossa onnettomuudet vähenivät 50 prosenttia vuonna 2005, tai Great Yarmouthiin, jossa ei ole kahteen vuoteen tapahtunut mainittavia onnettomuuksia. Haluan todeta esittelijä Jarzembowskille, että säädös olisi haitallinen työpaikkojen kannalta. Satamien omistajien mukaan direktiivi vaarantaisi Felixstowessa yli 600 uutta työpaikkaa ja Harwichissa yli 750 uutta työpaikkaa. Yksikään Tilburyn sataman 650 työpaikasta ei olisi turvattu. Näin satamien omistajat ajattelevat, ja heidän kannustimensa uusiin, tärkeisiin investointeihin romutettaisiin. Tilburyssa on keskeytetty jo kaksi uutta investointihanketta direktiivin aiheuttaman epävarmuuden vuoksi. Direktiivi vaarantaa myös Harwichissa hiljattain päätetyn sataman laajentamisen Bathside Bayn kohdalla sekä Felixstowen eteläsataman laajennusta koskevan myönteisen päätöksen, jota odotamme kovasti tällä viikolla. Totean Yhdistyneen kuningaskunnan itsenäisyyspuolueelle, että kyse on 1 miljardin Englannin punnan menoista, jos tarkistatte lukunne. Meidän ei edes tarvitsisi olla nyt täällä, elleivät teidän jäsenenne olisi äänestäneet säädöksen puolesta liikenne- ja matkailuvaliokunnassa. Investoinneista totean vielä, että Great Yarmouthissa yli kymmenen vuotta kestävään ulkosataman rakentamista koskevaan hankkeeseen direktiivi vaikuttaisi siten, että uusi satama joutuisi kilpailemaan nykyisen sisäsataman kanssa. Tällöin olemassa olevat työpaikat korvattaisiin toisilla, eivätkä työpaikat ja palvelut lisääntyisi tällä alueella, jota pidetään koko Euroopan unionin avainalueena työttömyyden torjunnassa. Voitte olla aivan varmoja, että direktiivistä kärsisivät eniten ammattitaitoiset satamatyöntekijät – sellaiset henkilöt, kuten Yarmouthin satamaa edustava Steven Drew, joka istuu virallisella lehterillä kuuntelemassa keskustelua ja joka isänsä Frankin kanssa ovat tarjonneet yhteensä 55 vuoden ajan satama-alan yhdistelmäpalveluja. Tarvitsemme satamien välistä mutta emme satamien sisäistä kilpailua. Euroopan unionin on tehtävä nyt se, mitä sen olisi pitänyt tehdä jo aiemmin: sen on kuultava satamia, ammattiliittoja ja laivayhtiöitä alusta alkaen, laadittava koko ehdotus uudelleen ja myönnettävä nyt esillä olevan ehdotuksen epäonnistuneen. Euroopan parlamentin, joka on yrittänyt hylätä tämän ehdotuksen lopullisesti, on äänestettävä nyt "ei" toista ja todellakin viimeistä kertaa."@fi⁷ "Monsieur le Président, lorsque le Parlement européen a rejeté, il y a deux ans, la proposition de directive sur les services portuaires, personne ne croyait que la Commission essaierait de la présenter à nouveau. Pourtant, elle n’a consulté et ne voulait écouter personne et elle a décidé d’ignorer ce Parlement démocratique. Parlons clairement des préjudices que cette directive, si elle est adoptée, occasionnerait aux ports, y compris les ports de la côte est, que je représente dans ce Parlement. Le remplacement de travailleurs hautement qualifiés et formés par le personnel des navires pouvant charger et décharger les marchandises entraînera d’office des accidents, des blessures et, peut-être, des décès. Pensez au port de Tilbury, qui est parvenu à réduire de moitié le nombre d’accidents en 2005, ou à Great Yarmouth, qui n’a enregistré aucun accident majeur en deux ans. Je voudrais dire à M. Jarzembowski que cette directive s’avérerait catastrophique pour les emplois. Les propriétaires de ports me confient que plus de 600 nouveaux emplois à Felixtowe et plus de 750 nouveaux emplois à Harwich seraient menacés. Pas un seul des 650 emplois au port de Tilbury ne serait sûr. C’est ce qu’affirment les propriétaires de ports eux-mêmes, qui ne bénéficieraient plus des incitations destinées à de nouveaux investissements vitaux. Deux nouveaux projets d’investissement à Tilbury ont déjà été suspendus en raison des incertitudes que suscite cette directive. L’extension du port à Bathside Bay, récemment approuvée à Harwich, et la décision favorable que nous espérons obtenir cette semaine pour l’extension de Felixtowe South sont toutes deux compromises. Je voudrais demander au parti pour l’indépendance du Royaume-Uni, qui représente un milliard de livres sterling de dépenses, de vérifier ses chiffres. Nous ne devrions même pas nous trouver ici, aujourd’hui, si les membres de votre parti n’avaient pas voté en faveur de cette directive au sein de la commission des transports et du tourisme. Pour en revenir aux investissements, il existe à Great Yarmouth une campagne initiée il y a plus de dix ans en faveur de la construction d’un avant-port, laquelle mettrait celui-ci en concurrence avec le port intérieur déjà présent, car cet avant-port entraînerait le transfert et non la hausse du nombre d’emplois et de services, et ce dans une région reconnue comme prioritaire dans la lutte contre le chômage au sein de l’Union européenne. Ne vous trompez pas; ce sont des dockers qualifiés qui souffriront le plus, des personnes telles que Steven Drew, de Yarmouth, qui écoute ce débat depuis la tribune des visiteurs, et qui, comme son père Frank, a servi le secteur portuaire durant 55 ans. La concurrence est nécessaire entre les ports, mais pas en leur sein. L’Union européenne devrait à présent faire ce qu’elle aurait dû faire auparavant: consulter les ports, les syndicats et les lignes maritimes, en recommençant à zéro, en prenant une feuille blanche, et sur cette proposition elle devrait reconnaître son échec. Ce Parlement européen, qui avait tenté de rejeter la proposition une bonne fois pour toutes, devrait maintenant voter «non» une deuxième fois, et ce de manière définitive."@fr⁸ "Mr President, when the European Parliament threw out the proposed port services directive two years ago no one believed that the Commission would try to bring it back. Yet it did not consult, it would not listen and it decided to ignore this democratic parliament. Let us be very clear about the damage that this law, if adopted, would inflict on ports, including the east coast ports which I represent in this Parliament. Replacing highly skilled, trained staff with ships’ crew able to load and unload is a recipe for accidents, injury and, possibly, deaths. Compare that with the port of Tilbury, which achieved a 50% reduction in accidents in 2005, or Great Yarmouth, which has seen no reportable accidents for two years. I want to say to Mr Jarzembowski that this law would be devastating for jobs. Port owners tell me that over 600 new jobs at Felixstowe and over 750 new jobs at Harwich would all be threatened. Not one of 650 jobs at the port of Tilbury would be safe. That is what the port owners say themselves and these port owners would see their incentive for vital new investments destroyed. Already two new investment projects at Tilbury have been put on hold because of the uncertainty created by this directive. Port expansion at Bathside Bay, so recently approved at Harwich, and the positive decision we very much hope for this week for the Felixstowe South expansion, are both in jeopardy. I would say to the UK Independence Party, that represents GBP 1 billion of expenditure, if you check your figures; and we would not even have to be here now but for the fact that your members voted for this legislation in the Committee on Transport and Tourism. On investment again, in Great Yarmouth a campaign for more than a decade to build an outer harbour would see this put in competition with the existing inner harbour, substituting existing jobs rather than expanding jobs and services in an area recognised as a priority to tackle unemployment in the whole of the European Union. Make no mistake, it is skilled dock workers who would suffer most – people like Steven Drew from Yarmouth, sitting in the Public Gallery listening to this debate, who, together with his father Frank before him, have given 55 years’ combined service to the ports industry. Competition is needed between ports, not within them. The European Union should now do what it should have done before: consult ports, trade unions and shipping lines from scratch, starting with a blank sheet of paper, and on this proposal it should admit defeat. This European Parliament, having sought to reject this proposal once and for all, should now vote ‘no’ for a second time and never again."@hu¹¹ "Signor Presidente, quando il Parlamento europeo respinse due anni fa la proposta di direttiva sui servizi portuali, nessuno credeva che la Commissione avrebbe cercato di ripresentarla. Invece non ci ha consultati, non ci ha ascoltati e ha deciso di ignorare questo parlamento democratico. Dobbiamo essere molto chiari sui danni che questa legge, se adottata, arrecherebbe ai porti, compresi i porti della costa orientale che io rappresento in questo Parlamento. Lo sostituzione di personale altamente qualificato ed addestrato con equipaggi in grado di caricare e scaricare è una ricetta che produrrà incidenti, feriti, e forse, morti. Prendete a confronto il porto di Tilbury, che nel 2005 è riuscito a ridurre del 50 per cento gli incidenti, o Great Yarmouth, che da due anni non registra incidenti degni di nota. Desidero dire all’onorevole Jarzembowski che questa legge avrebbe conseguenze devastanti per i posti di lavoro. I proprietari dei porti mi dicono che sarebbero a rischio oltre 600 nuovi posti di lavoro a Felixstowe e oltre 750 nuovi posti di lavoro a Harwich. E nemmeno uno dei 650 posti di lavoro nel porto di Tilbury sarebbe garantito. E’ quello che dicono i proprietari dei porti stessi, che vedrebbero distrutti gli incentivi per nuovi investimenti essenziali. Già due progetti di investimento a Tilbury sono stati per ora sospesi in ragione dell’incertezza creata da questa direttiva. L’ampliamento del porto di Bathside Bay, recentemente approvato a Harwich, e la decisione positiva, che speriamo sia presa questa settimana relativamente all’ampliamento di Felixstowe South, sono entrambi a rischio. Vorrei dire al Partito per l’indipendenza del Regno Unito che è una spesa di 1 miliardo di sterline, se controllate i vostri dati; e non avremmo nemmeno dovuto essere qui, se non fosse per il fatto che i membri del vostro partito hanno votato a favore di questo atto legislativo nella commissione per i trasporti e il turismo. Ancora in tema di investimento, a Great Yarmouth, una campagna in corso da oltre dieci anni per la costruzione di un avanporto finirebbe col metterlo in concorrenza con il retroporto esistente, sostituendo gli attuali posti di lavoro invece di accrescere i posti di lavoro e i servizi in un’area considerata prioritaria per affrontare il problema della disoccupazione in tutta l’Unione europea. Non dobbiamo fare errori, perché a soffrirne di più sarebbero i lavoratori portuali qualificati – persone come Steven Drew di Yarmouth, che è seduto in tribuna ed ascolta il nostro dibattito. Steven Drew e suo padre Frank prima di lui hanno lavorato complessivamente per 55 anni per il settore portuale. La concorrenza è necessaria tra i porti, ma non all’interno dei porti. L’Unione europea dovrebbe fare adesso quello che avrebbe dovuto già fare: consultare i porti, i sindacati e le compagnie di trasporto marittimo ripartendo da zero, iniziando con un bel foglio di carta bianco, e su questa proposta dovrebbe ammettere di essere stata sconfitta. Questo Parlamento europeo, dopo aver cercato di respingere la proposta una volta per tutte, dovrebbe ora votare “no” per la seconda e ultima volta."@it¹² "Mr President, when the European Parliament threw out the proposed port services directive two years ago no one believed that the Commission would try to bring it back. Yet it did not consult, it would not listen and it decided to ignore this democratic parliament. Let us be very clear about the damage that this law, if adopted, would inflict on ports, including the east coast ports which I represent in this Parliament. Replacing highly skilled, trained staff with ships’ crew able to load and unload is a recipe for accidents, injury and, possibly, deaths. Compare that with the port of Tilbury, which achieved a 50% reduction in accidents in 2005, or Great Yarmouth, which has seen no reportable accidents for two years. I want to say to Mr Jarzembowski that this law would be devastating for jobs. Port owners tell me that over 600 new jobs at Felixstowe and over 750 new jobs at Harwich would all be threatened. Not one of 650 jobs at the port of Tilbury would be safe. That is what the port owners say themselves and these port owners would see their incentive for vital new investments destroyed. Already two new investment projects at Tilbury have been put on hold because of the uncertainty created by this directive. Port expansion at Bathside Bay, so recently approved at Harwich, and the positive decision we very much hope for this week for the Felixstowe South expansion, are both in jeopardy. I would say to the UK Independence Party, that represents GBP 1 billion of expenditure, if you check your figures; and we would not even have to be here now but for the fact that your members voted for this legislation in the Committee on Transport and Tourism. On investment again, in Great Yarmouth a campaign for more than a decade to build an outer harbour would see this put in competition with the existing inner harbour, substituting existing jobs rather than expanding jobs and services in an area recognised as a priority to tackle unemployment in the whole of the European Union. Make no mistake, it is skilled dock workers who would suffer most – people like Steven Drew from Yarmouth, sitting in the Public Gallery listening to this debate, who, together with his father Frank before him, have given 55 years’ combined service to the ports industry. Competition is needed between ports, not within them. The European Union should now do what it should have done before: consult ports, trade unions and shipping lines from scratch, starting with a blank sheet of paper, and on this proposal it should admit defeat. This European Parliament, having sought to reject this proposal once and for all, should now vote ‘no’ for a second time and never again."@lt¹⁴ "Mr President, when the European Parliament threw out the proposed port services directive two years ago no one believed that the Commission would try to bring it back. Yet it did not consult, it would not listen and it decided to ignore this democratic parliament. Let us be very clear about the damage that this law, if adopted, would inflict on ports, including the east coast ports which I represent in this Parliament. Replacing highly skilled, trained staff with ships’ crew able to load and unload is a recipe for accidents, injury and, possibly, deaths. Compare that with the port of Tilbury, which achieved a 50% reduction in accidents in 2005, or Great Yarmouth, which has seen no reportable accidents for two years. I want to say to Mr Jarzembowski that this law would be devastating for jobs. Port owners tell me that over 600 new jobs at Felixstowe and over 750 new jobs at Harwich would all be threatened. Not one of 650 jobs at the port of Tilbury would be safe. That is what the port owners say themselves and these port owners would see their incentive for vital new investments destroyed. Already two new investment projects at Tilbury have been put on hold because of the uncertainty created by this directive. Port expansion at Bathside Bay, so recently approved at Harwich, and the positive decision we very much hope for this week for the Felixstowe South expansion, are both in jeopardy. I would say to the UK Independence Party, that represents GBP 1 billion of expenditure, if you check your figures; and we would not even have to be here now but for the fact that your members voted for this legislation in the Committee on Transport and Tourism. On investment again, in Great Yarmouth a campaign for more than a decade to build an outer harbour would see this put in competition with the existing inner harbour, substituting existing jobs rather than expanding jobs and services in an area recognised as a priority to tackle unemployment in the whole of the European Union. Make no mistake, it is skilled dock workers who would suffer most – people like Steven Drew from Yarmouth, sitting in the Public Gallery listening to this debate, who, together with his father Frank before him, have given 55 years’ combined service to the ports industry. Competition is needed between ports, not within them. The European Union should now do what it should have done before: consult ports, trade unions and shipping lines from scratch, starting with a blank sheet of paper, and on this proposal it should admit defeat. This European Parliament, having sought to reject this proposal once and for all, should now vote ‘no’ for a second time and never again."@lv¹³ "Mr President, when the European Parliament threw out the proposed port services directive two years ago no one believed that the Commission would try to bring it back. Yet it did not consult, it would not listen and it decided to ignore this democratic parliament. Let us be very clear about the damage that this law, if adopted, would inflict on ports, including the east coast ports which I represent in this Parliament. Replacing highly skilled, trained staff with ships’ crew able to load and unload is a recipe for accidents, injury and, possibly, deaths. Compare that with the port of Tilbury, which achieved a 50% reduction in accidents in 2005, or Great Yarmouth, which has seen no reportable accidents for two years. I want to say to Mr Jarzembowski that this law would be devastating for jobs. Port owners tell me that over 600 new jobs at Felixstowe and over 750 new jobs at Harwich would all be threatened. Not one of 650 jobs at the port of Tilbury would be safe. That is what the port owners say themselves and these port owners would see their incentive for vital new investments destroyed. Already two new investment projects at Tilbury have been put on hold because of the uncertainty created by this directive. Port expansion at Bathside Bay, so recently approved at Harwich, and the positive decision we very much hope for this week for the Felixstowe South expansion, are both in jeopardy. I would say to the UK Independence Party, that represents GBP 1 billion of expenditure, if you check your figures; and we would not even have to be here now but for the fact that your members voted for this legislation in the Committee on Transport and Tourism. On investment again, in Great Yarmouth a campaign for more than a decade to build an outer harbour would see this put in competition with the existing inner harbour, substituting existing jobs rather than expanding jobs and services in an area recognised as a priority to tackle unemployment in the whole of the European Union. Make no mistake, it is skilled dock workers who would suffer most – people like Steven Drew from Yarmouth, sitting in the Public Gallery listening to this debate, who, together with his father Frank before him, have given 55 years’ combined service to the ports industry. Competition is needed between ports, not within them. The European Union should now do what it should have done before: consult ports, trade unions and shipping lines from scratch, starting with a blank sheet of paper, and on this proposal it should admit defeat. This European Parliament, having sought to reject this proposal once and for all, should now vote ‘no’ for a second time and never again."@mt¹⁵ "Mijnheer de Voorzitter, toen het Europees Parlement de voorgestelde havendienstenrichtlijn twee jaar geleden verwierp, dacht niemand dat de Commissie het voorstel opnieuw zou indienen. Desondanks heeft de Commissie het Parlement niet geraadpleegd. Ze heeft niet geluisterd en heeft besloten dit democratisch gekozen Parlement te negeren. Laten we duidelijk zijn over de schade die bij havens, waaronder de havens langs de oostkust, die ik in dit Parlement vertegenwoordig, wordt aangericht als deze wet wordt aangenomen. Zeer bekwaam, goed opgeleid personeel vervangen door bemanningsleden die kunnen laden en lossen, is een recept voor ongevallen, gewonden en mogelijk doden. Zet dat maar eens naast de haven van Tilbury, waar het aantal ongevallen in 2005 gehalveerd is, of Great Yarmouth, waar al twee jaar geen noemenswaardige ongevallen zijn gemeld. Ik kan de heer Jarzembowski wel vertellen dat deze wet een verwoestend effect op de werkgelegenheid zou hebben. Haveneigenaars vertellen me dat in Felixstowe ruim zeshonderd banen en in Harwich ruim 750 banen in gevaar zouden komen. Geen van de 650 banen in de haven van Tilbury zou nog veilig zijn. Dat is wat de haveneigenaars zelf zeggen en deze haveneigenaars zouden de prikkels voor essentiële investeringen zien verdwijnen. Er zijn al twee nieuwe investeringsprojecten in Tilbury in de ijskast gestopt vanwegee de onzekerheid in verband met deze richtlijn. De uitbreiding van de haven bij Bathside Bay, waar in Harwich pas nog goedkeuring voor is gegeven, en de uitbreiding van Felixstowe-Zuid, waarover deze week hopelijk een positief besluit wordt genomen, lopen allebei gevaar. Ik wijs de UK Independence Party erop dat dit goed is voor één miljard pond aan uitgaven. Sla de cijfers er maar op na. Als uw leden niet voor deze wetgeving hadden gestemd in de Commissie vervoer en toerisme, hadden we hier nu niet zitten debatteren. Wat investeringen betreft: in Great Yarmouth loopt al meer dan tien jaar een campagne voor het bouwen van een buitenhaven. Zo’n buitenhaven zou gaan concurreren met de bestaande binnenhaven en zou eerder leiden tot vervanging van bestaande banen dan tot meer banen en diensten in een gebied dat op de prioriteitenlijst van de Europese Unie staat voor de aanpak van de werkloosheid. Vergis u niet: het zijn de geschoolde havenarbeiders die er het meest onder te leiden zouden hebben - mensen zoals Steven Drew uit Yarmouth, die dit debat vanaf de bezoekerstribune volgt, en zijn vader vóór hem, die samen 55 jaar van hun leven aan de havenindustrie hebben gegeven. Er moet concurrentie zijn tussen havens, niet binnen één haven. De Europese Unie moet nu doen wat ze al veel eerder had moeten doen: te rade gaan bij de havens, de vakbonden en de rederijen, met een schone lei beginnen en onder ogen zien dat dit voorstel wordt verworpen. Het Europees Parlement, dat dit voorstel voor eens en voor altijd wenst te verwerpen, moet nu voor de tweede keer nee stemmen en daarna nooit meer."@nl³ "Mr President, when the European Parliament threw out the proposed port services directive two years ago no one believed that the Commission would try to bring it back. Yet it did not consult, it would not listen and it decided to ignore this democratic parliament. Let us be very clear about the damage that this law, if adopted, would inflict on ports, including the east coast ports which I represent in this Parliament. Replacing highly skilled, trained staff with ships’ crew able to load and unload is a recipe for accidents, injury and, possibly, deaths. Compare that with the port of Tilbury, which achieved a 50% reduction in accidents in 2005, or Great Yarmouth, which has seen no reportable accidents for two years. I want to say to Mr Jarzembowski that this law would be devastating for jobs. Port owners tell me that over 600 new jobs at Felixstowe and over 750 new jobs at Harwich would all be threatened. Not one of 650 jobs at the port of Tilbury would be safe. That is what the port owners say themselves and these port owners would see their incentive for vital new investments destroyed. Already two new investment projects at Tilbury have been put on hold because of the uncertainty created by this directive. Port expansion at Bathside Bay, so recently approved at Harwich, and the positive decision we very much hope for this week for the Felixstowe South expansion, are both in jeopardy. I would say to the UK Independence Party, that represents GBP 1 billion of expenditure, if you check your figures; and we would not even have to be here now but for the fact that your members voted for this legislation in the Committee on Transport and Tourism. On investment again, in Great Yarmouth a campaign for more than a decade to build an outer harbour would see this put in competition with the existing inner harbour, substituting existing jobs rather than expanding jobs and services in an area recognised as a priority to tackle unemployment in the whole of the European Union. Make no mistake, it is skilled dock workers who would suffer most – people like Steven Drew from Yarmouth, sitting in the Public Gallery listening to this debate, who, together with his father Frank before him, have given 55 years’ combined service to the ports industry. Competition is needed between ports, not within them. The European Union should now do what it should have done before: consult ports, trade unions and shipping lines from scratch, starting with a blank sheet of paper, and on this proposal it should admit defeat. This European Parliament, having sought to reject this proposal once and for all, should now vote ‘no’ for a second time and never again."@pl¹⁶ "Senhor Presidente, quando, há dois anos, o Parlamento Europeu rejeitou a proposta de directiva relativa aos serviços portuários ninguém pensou que a Comissão tentasse apresentá-la de novo. Mas a verdade é que, sem proceder a consultas, sem ouvir opiniões, decidiu ignorar este Parlamento democrático. Há que ser muito claro quanto aos danos que esta lei, a ser adoptada, traria aos portos, incluindo os portos da costa leste, que represento neste Parlamento. Substituir pessoal altamente especializado e treinado pela tripulação dos navios, que passaria a poder proceder às operações de carregamento e descarga, é um passo na direcção de acidentes, lesões e, eventualmente, mortes. Comparemos esta visão com o que se passa no porto de Tilbury, que conseguiu reduzir os acidentes em 50% em 2005, ou de Great Yarmouth, onde de há dois anos a esta parte não se registam acidentes. Quero dizer ao senhor deputado Jarzembowski que esta lei teria um efeito devastador para o emprego. Os gestores dos portos informaram-me de que ficariam ameaçados mais de 600 novos postos de trabalho em Felixstowe e mais de 750 em Harwich. Dos 650 postos de trabalho do porto de Tilbury, nem um único se salvaria. É isto que dizem os próprios gestores dos portos, os quais veriam o seu esforço de incentivar novos investimentos caído por terra. Até agora, foram suspensos dois novos projectos de investimento em Tilbury devido à incerteza criada por esta directiva. Estão em perigo a expansão do porto de Bathside Bay, em Harwich, recentemente aprovada, e a decisão positiva que com tanta ansiedade aguardamos esta semana relativamente à expansão de Felixtowe South. Eu diria ao Partido da Independência do Reino Unido que, se fizer bem as contas, isto representa mil milhões de libras em despesas; e nem sequer estaríamos aqui agora se os membros do vosso partido não tivessem votado a favor desta legislação na Comissão dos Transportes e do Turismo. Voltando ao investimento, em Great Yarmouth, uma campanha em curso há mais de uma década para construir um porto exterior acabaria por o colocar numa situação de concorrência com o porto interior já existente, substituindo os actuais postos de trabalho em vez de expandir o emprego e os serviços numa área considerada prioritária para combater o desemprego em toda a União Europeia. Não nos iludamos, são os trabalhadores portuários especializados quem mais sofreria – pessoas como Steven Drew, de Yarmouth, que está sentado na galeria a assistir a este debate e que, em conjunto com o pai, Frank, deu um total de 55 anos de trabalho à indústria portuária. A concorrência é necessária entre portos e não dentro deles. A União Europeia devia fazer agora o que já devia ter feito antes: consultar os portos, os sindicatos e as companhias de navegação regulares começando do zero, com uma folha de papel em branco, e assumir a derrota quanto a esta proposta. Este Parlamento Europeu, que tentou rejeitar de uma vez por todas a presente proposta, devia voltar a votar contra, apresentando um não definitivo."@pt¹⁷ "Mr President, when the European Parliament threw out the proposed port services directive two years ago no one believed that the Commission would try to bring it back. Yet it did not consult, it would not listen and it decided to ignore this democratic parliament. Let us be very clear about the damage that this law, if adopted, would inflict on ports, including the east coast ports which I represent in this Parliament. Replacing highly skilled, trained staff with ships’ crew able to load and unload is a recipe for accidents, injury and, possibly, deaths. Compare that with the port of Tilbury, which achieved a 50% reduction in accidents in 2005, or Great Yarmouth, which has seen no reportable accidents for two years. I want to say to Mr Jarzembowski that this law would be devastating for jobs. Port owners tell me that over 600 new jobs at Felixstowe and over 750 new jobs at Harwich would all be threatened. Not one of 650 jobs at the port of Tilbury would be safe. That is what the port owners say themselves and these port owners would see their incentive for vital new investments destroyed. Already two new investment projects at Tilbury have been put on hold because of the uncertainty created by this directive. Port expansion at Bathside Bay, so recently approved at Harwich, and the positive decision we very much hope for this week for the Felixstowe South expansion, are both in jeopardy. I would say to the UK Independence Party, that represents GBP 1 billion of expenditure, if you check your figures; and we would not even have to be here now but for the fact that your members voted for this legislation in the Committee on Transport and Tourism. On investment again, in Great Yarmouth a campaign for more than a decade to build an outer harbour would see this put in competition with the existing inner harbour, substituting existing jobs rather than expanding jobs and services in an area recognised as a priority to tackle unemployment in the whole of the European Union. Make no mistake, it is skilled dock workers who would suffer most – people like Steven Drew from Yarmouth, sitting in the Public Gallery listening to this debate, who, together with his father Frank before him, have given 55 years’ combined service to the ports industry. Competition is needed between ports, not within them. The European Union should now do what it should have done before: consult ports, trade unions and shipping lines from scratch, starting with a blank sheet of paper, and on this proposal it should admit defeat. This European Parliament, having sought to reject this proposal once and for all, should now vote ‘no’ for a second time and never again."@sk¹⁸ "Mr President, when the European Parliament threw out the proposed port services directive two years ago no one believed that the Commission would try to bring it back. Yet it did not consult, it would not listen and it decided to ignore this democratic parliament. Let us be very clear about the damage that this law, if adopted, would inflict on ports, including the east coast ports which I represent in this Parliament. Replacing highly skilled, trained staff with ships’ crew able to load and unload is a recipe for accidents, injury and, possibly, deaths. Compare that with the port of Tilbury, which achieved a 50% reduction in accidents in 2005, or Great Yarmouth, which has seen no reportable accidents for two years. I want to say to Mr Jarzembowski that this law would be devastating for jobs. Port owners tell me that over 600 new jobs at Felixstowe and over 750 new jobs at Harwich would all be threatened. Not one of 650 jobs at the port of Tilbury would be safe. That is what the port owners say themselves and these port owners would see their incentive for vital new investments destroyed. Already two new investment projects at Tilbury have been put on hold because of the uncertainty created by this directive. Port expansion at Bathside Bay, so recently approved at Harwich, and the positive decision we very much hope for this week for the Felixstowe South expansion, are both in jeopardy. I would say to the UK Independence Party, that represents GBP 1 billion of expenditure, if you check your figures; and we would not even have to be here now but for the fact that your members voted for this legislation in the Committee on Transport and Tourism. On investment again, in Great Yarmouth a campaign for more than a decade to build an outer harbour would see this put in competition with the existing inner harbour, substituting existing jobs rather than expanding jobs and services in an area recognised as a priority to tackle unemployment in the whole of the European Union. Make no mistake, it is skilled dock workers who would suffer most – people like Steven Drew from Yarmouth, sitting in the Public Gallery listening to this debate, who, together with his father Frank before him, have given 55 years’ combined service to the ports industry. Competition is needed between ports, not within them. The European Union should now do what it should have done before: consult ports, trade unions and shipping lines from scratch, starting with a blank sheet of paper, and on this proposal it should admit defeat. This European Parliament, having sought to reject this proposal once and for all, should now vote ‘no’ for a second time and never again."@sl¹⁹ "Herr talman! När Europaparlamentet för två år sedan förkastade direktivet om hamntjänster trodde ingen att kommissionen skulle försöka ta tillbaka det. Likväl rådfrågade den inte, lyssnade inte till och beslutade sig för att ignorera detta demokratiska parlament. Låt oss vara tillräckligt tydliga om den skada denna lag skulle vålla hamnar om den antogs, inklusive östkustens hamnar som jag företräder i parlamentet. Att ersätta mycket kunnig, utbildad personal med fartygsbesättningar som kan lasta och lossa bäddar för olyckor, skador och eventuellt dödsfall. Jämför det med hamnen i Tilbury, som uppnådde en minskning av olyckorna på 50 procent 2005, eller hamnen i Great Yarmouth, som inte har haft någon olycka att rapportera om på över två år. Till Georg Jarzembowski vill jag säga att denna lag skulle vara förödande för arbetstillfällen. Hamnägare har sagt till mig att över 600 nya arbetstillfällen vid Felixstowe och över 750 nya arbetstillfällen vid Harwich skulle vara hotade. Inte ett enda av de 650 arbetstillfällena vid hamnen i Tilbury skulle vara säkert. Det är vad hamnägarna själva säger, och dessa hamnägare skulle få uppleva att deras incitament till avgörande nya investeringar förstörs. Två nya investeringsprojekt vid Tilbury har redan skjutits upp på grund av den osäkerhet detta direktiv har skapat. Hamnexpansionen i Bathside Bay, som nyligen har godkänts i Harwich, och det positiva beslutet om expansionen vid Felixstowe South, som vi hoppas så mycket på denna vecka, står båda på spel. Till UK Independence Party skulle jag vilja säga att det motsvarar 1 miljard pund sterling, om ni kontrollerar era uppgifter, och vi skulle inte ens behöva vara här nu om det inte hade varit för att era ledamöter röstade för denna lagstiftning i utskottet för transport och turism. Om vi återgår till investering, skulle den kampanj som har pågått i över ett decennium i Great Yarmouth för att bygga en yttre hamn få uppleva att denna ska konkurrera med den nuvarande inre hamnen. Det skulle innebära att de befintliga arbetstillfällena kommer att ersättas i stället för att arbetstillfällen och tjänster utökas på det område som är ett erkänt prioriterat område för att lösa arbetslöshet i hela Europeiska unionen. Begå inga misstag. Det är skickliga arbetare som kommer att lida mest – människor som Steven Drew från Yarmouth, som sitter på åhörarläktaren och lyssnar på den här debatten och som, tillsammans med sin far Frank före honom, sammanlagt har arbetat i 55 år inom hamnindustrin. Det behövs konkurrens mellan hamnar, men inte inom dem. Europeiska unionen borde nu göra det som borde ha gjorts förut, dvs. rådfråga hamnar, fackföreningar och linjerederier från början igen och börja med ett tomt pappersark, och genom detta förslag borde unionen erkänna sitt misslyckande. Europaparlamentet, som redan har försökt att förkasta detta förslag en gång för alla, bör nu rösta ”nej” för andra och absolut sista gången."@sv²¹
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"Richard Howitt (PSE ). –"^{5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,13,4}