Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-01-16-Speech-3-233"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020116.16.3-233"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, Madam Vice-President of the Commission, when I started working on this report, I thought I would be able to wrap it up in no time at all. In the end, it was far more complicated than I had imagined, but today we are on our way to an auspicious ending and that is what counts.
The aim of this proposal for a directive is to harmonise the maximum length of both rigid and articulated buses when undertaking transport throughout the European Union. Until now, this matter has not been regulated explicitly; there was only the guarantee that rigid buses of up to 12 metres and articulated buses of up to 18 metres could circulate freely in the European Union. At national level, for example, there are 4 different maximum lengths for rigid buses, meaning that some buses are unsuitable for EU-wide use, thereby distorting competition. The Member States wish to harmonise these maximum lengths, at least for buses used throughout the European Union, and have asked the Commission to work out a proposal.
I should like to remind the House that Parliament adopted 3 amendments at first reading. In the first amendment, it proposed extending the date until which Member States may authorise buses with dimensions not complying with the requirements of the new directive to circulate on their territory from December 2009, as proposed by the Commission, to 2015, in order to allow a normal economic life for those buses. The Council proposed stretching this date even further until December 2020, a modification the Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism agreed with fully. With the second amendment, the European Parliament proposes the same length of 18.75 metres for articulated buses, as for buses with trailers. The common position also accepted this amendment so of course we have no problem there. The last amendment allows rigid buses of up to 13.5 metres to have two axles. Buses between 13.5 and 15 metres long must have three axles, in order to avoid exceeding the maximum weight per axle. This amendment too was accepted. Only the part of this amendment defining "rigid" was not accepted, but this is a merely terminological question. It should be noted that the common position adopts the Commission's proposal to use the new manoeuvrability criteria which are in the process of being adopted within the Economic Committee for Europe of the United Nations in Geneva.
Portugal and the United Kingdom, I would remind you, may ban buses from their territory which do not comply with the old, stricter manoeuvrability criteria for up to three years after the directive enters into force. Similarly, Member States are allowed to impose local restrictions on the use of extra long buses for safety or other reasons. I am referring here to Article 7 of the common position, which the committee discussed at length. This should largely meet the concerns expressed in some amendments rejected at second reading in the Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism.
Consequently, it is clear from all this that there is nothing left for me to do but to propose, as the Committee has done, that Plenary adopt this common position without amendment, since it strikes a reasonable balance between internal market, regulatory, safety, technical and commercial considerations."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples