Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-12-13-Speech-3-452"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech⁶
dcterms:Date	"2006-12-13"^^xsd:date⁶
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Juhiload (uuestisõnastamine) (arutelu)⁶
dcterms:Language	"en"^^xsd:language⁶
lpv:document identification number	"en.20061213.39.3-452"⁶
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2006-12-13-Speech-3-453⁶
lpv:speaker	lp:Philip Bradbourn⁶
lpv:spoken text	"Mr President, firstly I would like to point out to the House that throughout the progress of this legislation I have been in favour of a common format – and I stress ‘format’ – for a driver’s licence across Europe. This would achieve the objective of easier recognition of licences by police and enforcement agencies in all Member States and lead to less fraud, which has been talked about already. This can, however, be achieved without all the red tape included in these proposals and in my view it is key to the principle of subsidiarity and proportionality that Member States retain the power to determine how their citizens obtain and retain their licence. For example, the measures now proposed would completely change the burden of proof, requiring citizens to prove that they can drive safely rather than, as at present, the state having to prove that they cannot. Regular renewals, even so-called administrative renewals of licences, would just push up costs to licence holders without improving road safety in the slightest way. I shall cite one example concerning motorcycles. These measures are ill-thought-out, over-prescriptive and will not lead to any improvements in road safety, simply to making it more difficult for motorcyclists to progress to more powerful bikes. This is not a road safety measure, it is nothing less than a cynical attempt to make life more difficult for those who use this mode of transport. Unfortunately, time does not permit me to detail all the matters in this directive to which I object but, put simply, in my opinion there is no added value in these proposals. They are over-regulatory, over-bureaucratic and unnecessary. I urge colleagues most sincerely to support my amendments to reject the common position in its entirety."@en⁴
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Delegation for relations with the countries of South Asia and the South Asia Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) (2005-02-18--2007-03-13)²² member; EPP-ED (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)²² member; TRAN (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)²² substitute; Delegation for relations with Canada (2004-09-15--2007-03-13)²² unknown; Conservative and Unionist Party (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)²² member; Delegation for relations with the United States (2004-09-15--2007-03-13)²² substitute; INTA (2005-03-17--2007-01-14)²² member; Delegation for relations with South Africa (2004-10-13--2007-03-13)²²
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, firstly I would like to point out to the House that throughout the progress of this legislation I have been in favour of a common format – and I stress ‘format’ – for a driver’s licence across Europe. This would achieve the objective of easier recognition of licences by police and enforcement agencies in all Member States and lead to less fraud, which has been talked about already. This can, however, be achieved without all the red tape included in these proposals and in my view it is key to the principle of subsidiarity and proportionality that Member States retain the power to determine how their citizens obtain and retain their licence. For example, the measures now proposed would completely change the burden of proof, requiring citizens to prove that they can drive safely rather than, as at present, the state having to prove that they cannot. Regular renewals, even so-called administrative renewals of licences, would just push up costs to licence holders without improving road safety in the slightest way. I shall cite one example concerning motorcycles. These measures are ill-thought-out, over-prescriptive and will not lead to any improvements in road safety, simply to making it more difficult for motorcyclists to progress to more powerful bikes. This is not a road safety measure, it is nothing less than a cynical attempt to make life more difficult for those who use this mode of transport. Unfortunately, time does not permit me to detail all the matters in this directive to which I object but, put simply, in my opinion there is no added value in these proposals. They are over-regulatory, over-bureaucratic and unnecessary. I urge colleagues most sincerely to support my amendments to reject the common position in its entirety."@cs¹ "Hr. formand! Først vil jeg gerne påpege over for Parlamentet, at jeg gennem hele lovgivningsprocessen har været tilhænger af et fælles format - og jeg understreger "format" - for kørekort over hele Europa. Dette vil opfylde målsætningen om, at politiet og de retshåndhævende myndigheder i alle medlemsstater vil få lettere ved at genkende førerbeviserne og føre til mindre svig, hvilket vi allerede har været inde på. Dette kan imidlertid opnås uden alt det bureaukrati, der findes i disse forslag, og efter min mening er det nøglen til subsidiaritets- og proprotionalitetsprincippet om, at medlemsstaterne bevarer beføjelserne til at beslutte, hvordan deres borgere erhverver og beholder deres kørekort. De foranstaltninger, der nu foreslås, vil f.eks. fuldkommen ændre bevisbyrden, idet man kræver, at borgerne beviser, at de kan køre sikkert, i stedet for som nu, hvor staten skal bevise, at de ikke kan. Regelmæssig fornyelse, også såkaldte administrative fornyelser af førerbeviser, vil blot føre til større udgifter for indehaverne af førerbeviserne uden at forbedre trafiksikkerheden det fjerneste. Jeg vil citere et eksempel vedrørende motorcykler. Disse foranstaltninger er dårligt gennemtænkt, overdrevet restriktive og vil ikke føre til forbedringer af trafiksikkerheden, idet man simpelthen gør det vanskeligere for motorcyklisterne at komme videre til kraftigere motorcykler. Dette er ikke en færdselssikkerhedsforanstaltning, det er intet mindre end et kynisk forsøg på at gøre livet sværere for dem, der bruger dette transportmiddel. Desværre giver tiden mig ikke mulighed for at komme nærmere ind på alle de spørgsmål i direktivet, som jeg er imod, men der er ganske enkelt ingen merværdi i disse forslag. De er overregulerende, overbureaukratiske og unødvendige. Jeg opfordrer helt ærligt mine kolleger til at støtte mit ændringsforslag om at forkaste den fælles holdning i sin helhed."@da² "Herr Präsident! Als Erstes möchte ich das Parlament darauf hinweisen, dass ich mich während des gesamten Entstehungsprozesses dieser Rechtsvorschrift für ein einheitliches Format – und ich betone „Format“ – des Europäischen Führerscheins ausgesprochen habe. Damit könnte erreicht werden, dass die Führerscheine von Polizei und Vollstreckungsbehörden in allen Mitgliedstaaten leichter erkannt werden und die Betrugsfälle zurückgehen, worüber schon gesprochen wurde. Das kann allerdings auch ohne die ganze Bürokratie erreicht werden, die in diesen Vorschlägen enthalten ist, denn meines Erachtens besagen doch die Grundsätze der Subsidiarität und der Verhältnismäßigkeit ganz klar, dass weiterhin die Mitgliedstaaten die Befugnis haben, um festzulegen, wie ihre Bürger ihren Führerschein erhalten und behalten. Mit den jetzt vorgeschlagenen Maßnahmen würde man beispielsweise die Beweislast völlig umkehren und von den Bürgern verlangen, dass sie ihre Fahrtüchtigkeit nachweisen, anstatt dass der Staat, wie es jetzt der Fall ist, nachweisen muss, dass sie nicht fahrtüchtig sind. Regelmäßige Erneuerungen, selbst die „von Amts wegen“, würden nur die Kosten für Führerscheininhaber nach oben treiben, ohne die Verkehrssicherheit auch nur im Geringsten zu verbessern. Ich möchte als Beispiel das Thema Motorräder nennen. Diese Maßnahmen sind schlecht durchdacht, zeugen von Regulierungswut und werden die Sicherheit im Straßenverkehr in keiner Weise verbessern, wenn für Motorradfahrer einfach der Zugang zu stärkeren Rädern erschwert wird. Dies ist keine Maßnahme zur Verkehrssicherheit, sondern nichts weiter als der zynische Versuch, denjenigen, die dieses Verkehrsmittel nutzen, das Leben schwer zu machen. Leider erlaubt es mir die Zeit nicht, im Einzelnen auf alle Punke dieser Richtlinie einzugehen, die ich ablehne, aber vereinfacht ausgedrückt beinhalten diese Vorschläge meines Erachtens keinen Mehrwert. Sie zeugen von zu viel Regulierung, zu viel Bürokratie und sind unnötig. Ich fordere die Kolleginnen und Kollegen ernsthaft auf, meine Änderungsanträge zur Ablehnung des gemeinsamen Standpunkts in seiner Gesamtheit zu unterstützen."@de⁹ "Κύριε Πρόεδρε, θέλω καταρχάς να επισημάνω στο Σώμα ότι καθ’ όλη τη διάρκεια της διαδικασίας εκπόνησης αυτής της νομοθεσίας τάχθηκα υπέρ ενός κοινού σχήματος –και τονίζω τη λέξη «σχήματος»– για μια άδεια οδήγησης σε όλη την Ευρώπη. Έτσι θα επιτευχθεί ο στόχος της ευκολότερης αναγνώρισης των αδειών από τις αστυνομίες και τις επίσημες αρχές όλων των κρατών μελών οδηγώντας σε μείωση της απάτης, θέμα το οποίο έχει ήδη συζητηθεί. Αυτό μπορεί, ωστόσο, να επιτευχθεί χωρίς τη γραφειοκρατία την οποία συνεπάγονται αυτές οι προτάσεις και, κατά τη γνώμη μου, είναι επιβεβλημένο για την τήρηση της αρχής της επικουρικότητας και της αναλογικότητας να διατηρήσουν τα κράτη μέλη την αρμοδιότητα να αποφασίσουν πώς θα αποκτούν και θα διατηρούν οι πολίτες τους την άδεια οδήγησής τους. Για παράδειγμα, τα μέτρα που προτείνονται τώρα θα μετέβαλλαν δραστικά το βάρος της αποδείξεως, υποχρεώνοντας τους πολίτες να αποδείξουν ότι μπορούν να οδηγούν με ασφάλεια, αντί, όπως ισχύει επί του παρόντος, να οφείλει το κράτος να αποδείξει το αντίθετο. Οι τακτικές ανανεώσεις, ακόμη και οι λεγόμενες διοικητικές ανανεώσεις των αδειών οδήγησης, θα οδηγούσαν απλώς σε αύξηση του κόστους για τους κατόχους αδειών χωρίς να βελτιώνεται καθόλου η οδική ασφάλεια. Θα αναφέρω ένα παράδειγμα που αφορά τους μοτοσικλετιστές. Τα μέτρα αυτά δεν είναι καλά μελετημένα, είναι υπερβολικά περιοριστικά και δεν πρόκειται να οδηγήσουν σε καμία βελτίωση της οδικής ασφάλειας· απλώς, θα καταστήσουν πιο δύσκολη για τους μοτοσικλετιστές την απόκτηση άδειας οδήγησης μοτοσικλετών μεγαλύτερου κυβισμού. Αυτό δεν είναι μέτρο ενίσχυσης της οδικής ασφάλειας· δεν είναι παρά μια κυνική απόπειρα δημιουργίας προβλημάτων σε όσους χρησιμοποιούν αυτό το μέσο μεταφοράς. Δυστυχώς, ο χρόνος που έχω στη διάθεσή μου δεν μου επιτρέπει να θίξω λεπτομερώς όλες τις πτυχές αυτής της οδηγίας με τις οποίες διαφωνώ αλλά, πολύ απλά, κατά τη γνώμη μου οι προτάσεις αυτές δεν προσφέρουν προστιθέμενη αξία. Είναι υπερβολικά περιοριστικές, υπερβολικά γραφειοκρατικές και περιττές. Απευθύνω θερμότατη έκκληση στους συναδέλφους να στηρίξουν τις τροπολογίες που κατέθεσα υπέρ της απόρριψης της κοινής θέσης στο σύνολό της."@el¹⁰ "Señor Presidente, en primer lugar quiero señalar a la Cámara que a través de todo este proceso legislativo he estado a favor de un formato común (y recalco: «formato») de permiso de conducción en toda Europa. Con esto se lograría el objetivo de facilitar el reconocimiento de las licencias por parte de la policía y las autoridades competentes de todos los Estados miembros y se reduciría el fraude, como ya se ha mencionado. Sin embargo, esto mismo se puede conseguir sin toda la burocracia que incluyen estas propuestas, y creo que es fundamental para los principios de subsidiariedad y proporcionalidad que los Estados miembros conserven la facultad de regular la obtención y la conservación del permiso por sus ciudadanos. Por ejemplo, las medidas propuestas cambiarían completamente la carga de la prueba, exigiendo a los ciudadanos que demuestren que pueden conducir con seguridad, en vez de ser el Estado quien deba probar lo contrario, como sucede ahora. Las renovaciones periódicas, incluso las llamadas renovaciones administrativas de permisos, no harían más que incrementar los gastos para los conductores sin aumentar lo más mínimo la seguridad vial. Citaré un ejemplo en cuanto a las motocicletas. Son medidas mal concebidas y excesivamente restrictivas y no conducirán a mejora alguna en la seguridad vial por el simple hecho de poner más difícil a los motociclistas progresar hacia motos más potentes. No es una medida de seguridad vial, sino un cínico intento de fastidiar a quienes utilizan este medio de transporte. Por desgracia, el tiempo no me permite detallar todos los aspectos de esta directiva a los que me opongo, pero, en pocas palabras, no veo que las propuestas añadan valor. Son sobrerreguladoras, hiperburocráticas e innecesarias. Insto a sus Señorías a que apoyen mis enmiendas para que la Posición Común sea rechazada en su totalidad."@es²⁰ "Mr President, firstly I would like to point out to the House that throughout the progress of this legislation I have been in favour of a common format – and I stress ‘format’ – for a driver’s licence across Europe. This would achieve the objective of easier recognition of licences by police and enforcement agencies in all Member States and lead to less fraud, which has been talked about already. This can, however, be achieved without all the red tape included in these proposals and in my view it is key to the principle of subsidiarity and proportionality that Member States retain the power to determine how their citizens obtain and retain their licence. For example, the measures now proposed would completely change the burden of proof, requiring citizens to prove that they can drive safely rather than, as at present, the state having to prove that they cannot. Regular renewals, even so-called administrative renewals of licences, would just push up costs to licence holders without improving road safety in the slightest way. I shall cite one example concerning motorcycles. These measures are ill-thought-out, over-prescriptive and will not lead to any improvements in road safety, simply to making it more difficult for motorcyclists to progress to more powerful bikes. This is not a road safety measure, it is nothing less than a cynical attempt to make life more difficult for those who use this mode of transport. Unfortunately, time does not permit me to detail all the matters in this directive to which I object but, put simply, in my opinion there is no added value in these proposals. They are over-regulatory, over-bureaucratic and unnecessary. I urge colleagues most sincerely to support my amendments to reject the common position in its entirety."@et⁵ "Arvoisa puhemies, ensinnäkin haluan todeta parlamentille, että koko tämän lainsäädäntöprosessin ajan olen kannattanut ajatusta koko EU:n yhteisestä ajokorttimallista – korostan, "mallista". Sen ansiosta poliisi ja lainvalvontaviranomaiset tunnistaisivat ajokortit helpommin kaikissa jäsenvaltioissa ja väärennökset vähenisivät, mistä on jo puhuttukin. Tämä päämäärä voidaan kuitenkin saavuttaa myös ilman näiden ehdotusten byrokraattisuutta. Mielestäni toissijaisuus- ja suhteellisuusperiaatteiden kannalta on tärkeää, että jäsenvaltioilla on jatkossakin valta päättää siitä, kuinka niiden kansalaiset saavat ja säilyttävät ajokorttinsa. Nyt ehdotetut toimet muuttaisivat täysin todistustaakan: kansalaisten pitäisi todistaa, että he pystyvät ajamaan turvallisesti, kun taas nykyisin valtion on todistettava, etteivät he siihen kykene. Säännölliset uusimiset, jopa niin kutsutut hallinnolliset uusimiset, vain lisäisivät kansalaisille koituvia kustannuksia parantamatta liikenneturvallisuutta vähäisimmässäkään määrin. Mainitsen yhden esimerkin. Moottoripyöriä koskevat toimet ovat harkitsemattomia, edustavat ylisääntelyä, eivätkä johda liikenneturvallisuuden parantumiseen, vaan ainoastaan vaikeuttavat moottoripyöräilijöiden siirtymistä tehokkaampiin pyöriin. Tämä ei ole liikenneturvallisuutta koskeva toimi, se on pelkästään kyyninen yritys vaikeuttaa niiden ihmisten elämää, jotka käyttävät tätä liikennemuotoa. Valitettavasti minulla ei ole aikaa mainita kaikkia niitä tämän direktiivin kohtia, joita vastustan, joten totean lyhyesti, että mielestäni nämä ehdotukset eivät tuo lisäarvoa. Ne edustavat ylisääntelyä, ovat turhia ja liian byrokraattisia. Kehotan vilpittömästi kollegoitani tukemaan tarkistuksiani koko yhteisen kannan hylkäämiseksi."@fi⁷ "Monsieur le Président, je tiens premièrement à faire remarquer à cette Assemblée que j’ai prôné, du début à la fin des travaux sur le présent instrument législatif, un format unique - et j’insiste sur le mot «format» - de permis de conduire en Europe. Ce format unique permettrait aux forces de police et aux agences de répression de tous les États membres de reconnaître plus rapidement les permis, réduisant par conséquent les pratiques frauduleuses, déjà évoquées précédemment. Néanmoins, la réalisation de cet objectif peut se passer de toutes les formalités administratives contenues dans ces propositions. En outre, il est primordial, pour le respect du principe de subsidiarité et de proportionnalité, que les États membres puissent continuer de déterminer les conditions d’obtention et de conservation du permis de conduire. Ainsi, les mesures qui sont aujourd’hui sur la table changeraient complètement la charge de la preuve, imposant aux citoyens de prouver qu’ils peuvent conduire prudemment, alors qu’aujourd’hui, c’est à l’État de prouver le contraire. Les renouvellements périodiques, même ce que l’on appelle les renouvellements administratifs de permis, ne feraient qu’augmenter les frais pour les titulaires de permis, sans pour autant améliorer la sécurité routière, ne fût-ce que dans d’infimes proportions. Je vous donnerai un exemple en ce qui concerne les motocycles. Ces mesures, mal conçues et trop dirigistes, loin d’entraîner une amélioration de la sécurité routière, ne feront que compliquer l’accès des motocyclistes à des engins plus puissants. Il ne s’agit pas d’une mesure favorisant la sécurité routière, mais de rien d’autre qu’une tentative cynique de compliquer la vie de ceux qui ont recours à ce moyen de transport. Malheureusement, le temps qui m’est imparti ne me permet pas de détailler tous les points de cette directive que je réfute. Néanmoins, dit simplement, ces propositions ne possèdent selon moi aucune valeur ajoutée. Elles se caractérisent par leur dirigisme, leur carcan administratif et leur inutilité. J’appelle vivement mes collègues à soutenir mes amendements qui visent à rejeter la position commune dans son intégralité."@fr⁸ "Mr President, firstly I would like to point out to the House that throughout the progress of this legislation I have been in favour of a common format – and I stress ‘format’ – for a driver’s licence across Europe. This would achieve the objective of easier recognition of licences by police and enforcement agencies in all Member States and lead to less fraud, which has been talked about already. This can, however, be achieved without all the red tape included in these proposals and in my view it is key to the principle of subsidiarity and proportionality that Member States retain the power to determine how their citizens obtain and retain their licence. For example, the measures now proposed would completely change the burden of proof, requiring citizens to prove that they can drive safely rather than, as at present, the state having to prove that they cannot. Regular renewals, even so-called administrative renewals of licences, would just push up costs to licence holders without improving road safety in the slightest way. I shall cite one example concerning motorcycles. These measures are ill-thought-out, over-prescriptive and will not lead to any improvements in road safety, simply to making it more difficult for motorcyclists to progress to more powerful bikes. This is not a road safety measure, it is nothing less than a cynical attempt to make life more difficult for those who use this mode of transport. Unfortunately, time does not permit me to detail all the matters in this directive to which I object but, put simply, in my opinion there is no added value in these proposals. They are over-regulatory, over-bureaucratic and unnecessary. I urge colleagues most sincerely to support my amendments to reject the common position in its entirety."@hu¹¹ "Signor Presidente, desidero anzi tutto far presente all’Assemblea che durante tutta la procedura legislativa che ha portato a questa direttiva mi sono espresso a favore di un formato comune – e sottolineo “formato” – per le patenti di guida nell’intera Europa, che favorirebbe un più semplice riconoscimento del documento da parte della polizia e dei responsabili dell’ordine pubblico in tutti gli Stati membri e ridurrebbe le possibilità di falsificazione, cui si è già accennato. Tutto questo, però, può essere realizzato senza dover ricorrere alla burocrazia prevista dalle proposte in esame, e a mio parere è fondamentale, nell’ottica del principio di sussidiarietà e di proporzionalità, che gli Stati membri mantengano la facoltà di stabilire le modalità di ottenimento e conservazione della patente di guida da parte dei rispettivi cittadini. Per esempio, le misure qui proposte invertirebbero l’onere della prova, imponendo ai cittadini di dimostrare di essere in grado di guidare in modo sicuro, invece di imporre allo Stato di dimostrare il contrario, come succede adesso. Rinnovi regolari, anche i cosiddetti rinnovi amministrativi delle patenti, non farebbero altro che aumentare i costi a carico degli automobilisti, senza tuttavia migliorare minimamente la sicurezza stradale. Citerò un solo esempio, che riguarda i motocicli. Le misure proposte sono mal concepite, eccessivamente prescrittive e non miglioreranno la sicurezza sulle strade, limitandosi a complicare ai motociclisti il passaggio a moto di potenza superiore. Questa non è una misura mirata alla sicurezza stradale, è soltanto un cinico tentativo di rendere la vita più difficile a coloro che utilizzano questi mezzi di trasporto. Purtroppo il tempo a mia disposizione non mi consente di entrare nei dettagli di tutti i punti della direttiva ai quali sono contrario; tuttavia, posso riassumere la mia posizione dicendo che queste proposte non contengono un valore aggiunto. Sono eccessivamente prescrittive, eccessivamente burocratiche e inutili. Chiedo vivamente ai colleghi di appoggiare i miei emendamenti volti a respingere la posizione comune nel suo insieme."@it¹² "Mr President, firstly I would like to point out to the House that throughout the progress of this legislation I have been in favour of a common format – and I stress ‘format’ – for a driver’s licence across Europe. This would achieve the objective of easier recognition of licences by police and enforcement agencies in all Member States and lead to less fraud, which has been talked about already. This can, however, be achieved without all the red tape included in these proposals and in my view it is key to the principle of subsidiarity and proportionality that Member States retain the power to determine how their citizens obtain and retain their licence. For example, the measures now proposed would completely change the burden of proof, requiring citizens to prove that they can drive safely rather than, as at present, the state having to prove that they cannot. Regular renewals, even so-called administrative renewals of licences, would just push up costs to licence holders without improving road safety in the slightest way. I shall cite one example concerning motorcycles. These measures are ill-thought-out, over-prescriptive and will not lead to any improvements in road safety, simply to making it more difficult for motorcyclists to progress to more powerful bikes. This is not a road safety measure, it is nothing less than a cynical attempt to make life more difficult for those who use this mode of transport. Unfortunately, time does not permit me to detail all the matters in this directive to which I object but, put simply, in my opinion there is no added value in these proposals. They are over-regulatory, over-bureaucratic and unnecessary. I urge colleagues most sincerely to support my amendments to reject the common position in its entirety."@lt¹⁴ "Mr President, firstly I would like to point out to the House that throughout the progress of this legislation I have been in favour of a common format – and I stress ‘format’ – for a driver’s licence across Europe. This would achieve the objective of easier recognition of licences by police and enforcement agencies in all Member States and lead to less fraud, which has been talked about already. This can, however, be achieved without all the red tape included in these proposals and in my view it is key to the principle of subsidiarity and proportionality that Member States retain the power to determine how their citizens obtain and retain their licence. For example, the measures now proposed would completely change the burden of proof, requiring citizens to prove that they can drive safely rather than, as at present, the state having to prove that they cannot. Regular renewals, even so-called administrative renewals of licences, would just push up costs to licence holders without improving road safety in the slightest way. I shall cite one example concerning motorcycles. These measures are ill-thought-out, over-prescriptive and will not lead to any improvements in road safety, simply to making it more difficult for motorcyclists to progress to more powerful bikes. This is not a road safety measure, it is nothing less than a cynical attempt to make life more difficult for those who use this mode of transport. Unfortunately, time does not permit me to detail all the matters in this directive to which I object but, put simply, in my opinion there is no added value in these proposals. They are over-regulatory, over-bureaucratic and unnecessary. I urge colleagues most sincerely to support my amendments to reject the common position in its entirety."@lv¹³ "Mr President, firstly I would like to point out to the House that throughout the progress of this legislation I have been in favour of a common format – and I stress ‘format’ – for a driver’s licence across Europe. This would achieve the objective of easier recognition of licences by police and enforcement agencies in all Member States and lead to less fraud, which has been talked about already. This can, however, be achieved without all the red tape included in these proposals and in my view it is key to the principle of subsidiarity and proportionality that Member States retain the power to determine how their citizens obtain and retain their licence. For example, the measures now proposed would completely change the burden of proof, requiring citizens to prove that they can drive safely rather than, as at present, the state having to prove that they cannot. Regular renewals, even so-called administrative renewals of licences, would just push up costs to licence holders without improving road safety in the slightest way. I shall cite one example concerning motorcycles. These measures are ill-thought-out, over-prescriptive and will not lead to any improvements in road safety, simply to making it more difficult for motorcyclists to progress to more powerful bikes. This is not a road safety measure, it is nothing less than a cynical attempt to make life more difficult for those who use this mode of transport. Unfortunately, time does not permit me to detail all the matters in this directive to which I object but, put simply, in my opinion there is no added value in these proposals. They are over-regulatory, over-bureaucratic and unnecessary. I urge colleagues most sincerely to support my amendments to reject the common position in its entirety."@mt¹⁵ "Voorzitter, in de eerste plaats wil ik het Parlement erop wijzen dat ik gedurende het hele proces van deze wetgevingsprocedure voorstander ben geweest van een gemeenschappelijk “formaat” - en ik benadruk het woord “formaat” - voor een Europees rijbewijs. Dat zal ertoe leiden dat politie en andere rechtshandhavers in alle lidstaten rijbewijzen gemakkelijker kunnen herkennen en dat de fraude zal afnemen, wat al aan de orde is geweest. Dan kan echter worden bereikt zonder alle bureaucratie waarvan deze voorstellen vergezeld gaan. Het is ook essentieel voor het subsidiariteits- en proportionaliteitsbeginsel dat de lidstaten zeggenschap behouden over de manier waarop hun burgers het rijbewijs behalen en behouden. De maatregelen die nu worden voorgesteld, keren bijvoorbeeld de bewijslast volledig om en eisen van de burger dat hij of zij aantoont veilig te kunnen rijden, in plaats van, zoals de situatie nu is, van de overheid te eisen aan te tonen dat de burger niet veilig kan rijden. Regelmatige vernieuwingen van het rijbewijs, zelfs zogenaamde administratieve vernieuwingen, jagen de houder van het rijbewijs alleen maar op kosten, zonder de veiligheid op de weg ook maar in de geringste mate ten goede te komen. Ik wil u één voorbeeld geven met betrekking tot motorrijwielen. Deze maatregelen zijn slecht doordacht, te bevoogdend en zullen niet leiden tot meer veiligheid op de weg, alleen omdat het motorrijders moeilijker wordt gemaakt om over te gaan naar een zwaarder model. Dit is geen maatregel die de veiligheid verhoogt. Het is niets anders dan een cynische poging om de mensen die van dit transportmiddel gebruikmaken, het leven zwaarder te maken. Helaas ontbreekt mij de tijd om in detail in te gaan op alle elementen van deze richtlijn waartegen ik bezwaar maak, maar, eenvoudig gezegd, voegen deze voorstellen niets toe. Ze zijn te bevoogdend, te bureaucratisch en overbodig. Ik dring er bij mijn collega's op aan mijn amendementen te steunen om het gemeenschappelijke standpunt in zijn geheel af te wijzen."@nl³ "Mr President, firstly I would like to point out to the House that throughout the progress of this legislation I have been in favour of a common format – and I stress ‘format’ – for a driver’s licence across Europe. This would achieve the objective of easier recognition of licences by police and enforcement agencies in all Member States and lead to less fraud, which has been talked about already. This can, however, be achieved without all the red tape included in these proposals and in my view it is key to the principle of subsidiarity and proportionality that Member States retain the power to determine how their citizens obtain and retain their licence. For example, the measures now proposed would completely change the burden of proof, requiring citizens to prove that they can drive safely rather than, as at present, the state having to prove that they cannot. Regular renewals, even so-called administrative renewals of licences, would just push up costs to licence holders without improving road safety in the slightest way. I shall cite one example concerning motorcycles. These measures are ill-thought-out, over-prescriptive and will not lead to any improvements in road safety, simply to making it more difficult for motorcyclists to progress to more powerful bikes. This is not a road safety measure, it is nothing less than a cynical attempt to make life more difficult for those who use this mode of transport. Unfortunately, time does not permit me to detail all the matters in this directive to which I object but, put simply, in my opinion there is no added value in these proposals. They are over-regulatory, over-bureaucratic and unnecessary. I urge colleagues most sincerely to support my amendments to reject the common position in its entirety."@pl¹⁶ "Senhor Presidente, em primeiro lugar, gostaria de assinalar à Câmara que, ao longo da progressão desta legislação, tenho sido favorável a um formato comum – e realço a palavra “formato” – para as cartas de condução em toda a Europa. Deste modo, atingiríamos o objectivo do mais fácil reconhecimento das cartas de condução pelos agentes da polícia e entidades de controlo em todos os Estados-Membros, levando a menor fraude, algo que já foi anteriormente referido. No entanto, podemos conseguir tudo isto sem toda a burocracia incluída nestas propostas, sendo, quanto a mim, essencial para o princípio da subsidiariedade e da proporcionalidade que os Estados-Membros retenham o poder para determinar o modo como os seus cidadãos obtêm e mantêm a sua carta de condução. Por exemplo, as medidas agora propostas irão alterar completamente o ónus da prova, requerendo aos cidadãos que provem a sua capacidade para conduzir em segurança, em vez de ser como no presente em que tem de ser o Estado a provar que não. As renovações normais de carta, mesmo as chamadas renovações administrativas, iriam apenas fazer subir os custos a pagar pelos seus detentores sem melhorarem, nem de longe, a segurança rodoviária. Vou citar um exemplo relativamente aos motociclos. As presentes medidas foram mal concebidas, são demasiado prescritivas e não vão dar origem a quaisquer melhoramentos na segurança rodoviária, apenas tornando mais difícil aos motociclistas a progressão para motociclos mais potentes. Não se trata de uma medida de segurança rodoviária: é, nada mais, nada menos, do que uma tentativa cínica de dificultar a vida àqueles que utilizam este modo de transporte. Lamentavelmente, o tempo não me permite entrar em pormenores relativamente a todos os temas desta directiva, e aos quais me oponho. Mas, simplesmente digo que estas propostas não contêm qualquer espécie de valor acrescentado. São excessivamente regulamentadoras, super-burocráticas e desnecessárias. Exorto, muito sinceramente, os colegas a darem o seu apoio às alterações por mim apresentadas no sentido de rejeitar a posição comum na sua totalidade."@pt¹⁷ "Mr President, firstly I would like to point out to the House that throughout the progress of this legislation I have been in favour of a common format – and I stress ‘format’ – for a driver’s licence across Europe. This would achieve the objective of easier recognition of licences by police and enforcement agencies in all Member States and lead to less fraud, which has been talked about already. This can, however, be achieved without all the red tape included in these proposals and in my view it is key to the principle of subsidiarity and proportionality that Member States retain the power to determine how their citizens obtain and retain their licence. For example, the measures now proposed would completely change the burden of proof, requiring citizens to prove that they can drive safely rather than, as at present, the state having to prove that they cannot. Regular renewals, even so-called administrative renewals of licences, would just push up costs to licence holders without improving road safety in the slightest way. I shall cite one example concerning motorcycles. These measures are ill-thought-out, over-prescriptive and will not lead to any improvements in road safety, simply to making it more difficult for motorcyclists to progress to more powerful bikes. This is not a road safety measure, it is nothing less than a cynical attempt to make life more difficult for those who use this mode of transport. Unfortunately, time does not permit me to detail all the matters in this directive to which I object but, put simply, in my opinion there is no added value in these proposals. They are over-regulatory, over-bureaucratic and unnecessary. I urge colleagues most sincerely to support my amendments to reject the common position in its entirety."@sk¹⁸ "Mr President, firstly I would like to point out to the House that throughout the progress of this legislation I have been in favour of a common format – and I stress ‘format’ – for a driver’s licence across Europe. This would achieve the objective of easier recognition of licences by police and enforcement agencies in all Member States and lead to less fraud, which has been talked about already. This can, however, be achieved without all the red tape included in these proposals and in my view it is key to the principle of subsidiarity and proportionality that Member States retain the power to determine how their citizens obtain and retain their licence. For example, the measures now proposed would completely change the burden of proof, requiring citizens to prove that they can drive safely rather than, as at present, the state having to prove that they cannot. Regular renewals, even so-called administrative renewals of licences, would just push up costs to licence holders without improving road safety in the slightest way. I shall cite one example concerning motorcycles. These measures are ill-thought-out, over-prescriptive and will not lead to any improvements in road safety, simply to making it more difficult for motorcyclists to progress to more powerful bikes. This is not a road safety measure, it is nothing less than a cynical attempt to make life more difficult for those who use this mode of transport. Unfortunately, time does not permit me to detail all the matters in this directive to which I object but, put simply, in my opinion there is no added value in these proposals. They are over-regulatory, over-bureaucratic and unnecessary. I urge colleagues most sincerely to support my amendments to reject the common position in its entirety."@sl¹⁹ "Herr talman! Jag skulle först av allt vilja påpeka för kammaren att genom hela detta ärendes gång har jag varit för ett gemensamt format – och jag betonar ”format” – för ett europeiskt körkort. Det skulle medföra att polis och brottsbekämpande organ i samtliga medlemsstater lättare kunde känna igen körkorten, och detta skulle resultera i färre bedrägerier, något som vi redan har talat om. Detta kan emellertid åstadkommas utan all den byråkrati som ingår i dessa förslag och jag anser att nyckeln till subsidiaritets- och proportionalitetsprinciperna är att medlemsstaterna får behålla makten att bestämma hur deras medborgare erhåller och behåller sitt körkort. De åtgärder som nu föreslås skulle exempelvis fullständigt förändra bevisbördan och kräva att medborgarna visar att de köra på ett säkert sätt, istället för som i nuläget behöva visa att de inte kan det. Regelbundna förnyelser, även så kallade administrativa körkortsförnyelser, skulle endast driva upp kostnaderna för körkortsinnehavare utan att på något sätt förbättra trafiksäkerheten. Jag ska ge ett exempel gällande motorcyklar. Åtgärderna är dåligt genomtänkta, alltför normativa och kommer inte att leda till några förbättringar av trafiksäkerheten, utan helt enkelt göra det svårare för motorcyklister att gå vidare till tyngre motorcyklar. Detta är inte en trafiksäkerhetsåtgärd, det är ingenting mindre än ett cyniskt försök att göra livet surt för dem som använder detta transportmedel. Tyvärr tillåter inte tiden att jag går in i detalj på alla de saker i direktivet som jag protesterar mot, men kort sagt finns det i mitt tycke inget mervärde i förslagen. De innehåller alltför många bestämmelser, är alltför byråkratiska och onödiga. Jag uppmanar verkligen kollegerna att stödja mina ändringsförslag om att avslå den gemensamma ståndpunkten i dess helhet."@sv²¹
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"Philip Bradbourn (PPE-DE ). –"^{5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,13,4}