Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-01-18-Speech-2-141"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20000118.5.2-141"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
"Mr President, one can only welcome the Commissioner’s factual and rational observations, for unlike others, she did not fall prey to collective hypocrisy. The catastrophe comes as no surprise. I do not know precisely how many, but any number of ships which are practically floating time bombs in European waters, sail every day, and as far as I can see, a catastrophe of this kind could happen again any day. We have been aware of this here in this Parliament for over ten years now – there was the Commission’s communication and the report by Mr Ken Stewart, which made mention even at that stage of all the areas in which legislation needed to be passed. It all revolves around the ships, the technology, the equipment; we are talking about the ports, how they are organised and what they have to say for themselves, and, of course, it is all about teamwork. We know full well where the opposition to every single, solitary legislative measure has come from in the course of the last few years. It always came from the Member States, from the Council of Ministers, where they fought doggedly over every trifling matter, achieving very little in terms of progress. If we expect car-owning citizens to have a clean bill of health themselves and to fulfil the legal, personal requirements and also have their cars regularly inspected, then it ought to be possible for the same to apply to ships. Control is the key word here. Is it really pure coincidence that, to a lesser or greater extent, it is always the same states that allow these ships to fly under their flags? So why is there no black list? If there are dangerous death traps in European waters, then why do we not say, as is the case elsewhere, that these should not be allowed to enter European waters and call at European ports? Therefore, what I would really like to see in your catalogue of measures for the summer is overall inspections for all tankers currently sailing in European waters, and I would also like an update on what the Member States have actually subscribed to and indeed implemented so far, in the way of IMO regulations and conventions, for there is still some dragging of feet there. What happened to Erika cannot be put down to sloppy work, but, as far as I am concerned, to collective, criminal responsibility, and we in Parliament will have the opportunity in the course of the next few months, to demonstrate in the case of one matter in particular, whether we are taking this seriously. I am referring to port reception installations, a matter for the Member States. This will come up for discussion again, and when it does, I hope that we will all still hold the same opinions as we do today."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph