Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-06-13-Speech-3-183"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010613.5.3-183"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, although a number of questions remain open, let me say from the outset that I endorse the three reports before us on the ‘Erika II’ package, while at the same time emphasising that we urgently need to adopt them and, even more, to implement them.
Improvements are still needed and, I hope, are still possible; that is the purpose of the amendments my group has tabled. I will confine my comments to two points I regard as crucial.
The first is the need for greater democracy, to enable the various players involved in this sector to have a say in the decision-making process. Secondly, we must go further on the question of compensation.
Coming back to the first point, priority must be attached to giving the men and women involved a say. That is a democratic requirement to which the European Union constantly refers as one of its values; but it is also a question of effectiveness. If we want to improve safety at sea we must also mobilise all the citizens concerned, in particular nature conservation associations, trade union organisations and, more generally, the personnel involved in maritime traffic.
With regard to compensation, we very much need this initiative. We have to listen to the victims, the elected representatives, the local associations involved. We must give them a say in the actual evaluation of the consequences of the damage as also in the decisions on compensation. They have a role to play in the management of the COPE Fund. The same requirement should apply to the Safety Agency, which should be open to representatives of the employees of this industry, to representatives of the associations, who have the kind of know-how that is crucial to any proper evaluation. In even broader terms, I believe that the agency should ensure that they are involved in its initiatives on a regular basis.
On the second point, it is unacceptable that in the final analysis much of the damage caused by maritime disasters is borne by the people who are the victims. That is the reason for establishing the COPE Fund and that is why we are supporting this initiative. Let me say once again that I think it would be very judicious to hold the ship owners and charterers liable both financially and under criminal law. We must also establish the link between the nationality of the ship owner and the flag flown by the ship.
Lastly, according to some estimates, the COPE compensation ceiling of EUR 1 billion will suffice for the
disaster. I believe that to accept that ceiling would mean accepting that we do not pay full compensation for other disasters, which, alas, we cannot exclude at this point, and therefore that the countries concerned have to bear much of the costs.
We would have preferred no ceiling to be set, so that the compensation corresponded as closely as possible to the real need; in the meantime, I believe we should consider raising that ceiling."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples