Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-01-14-Speech-2-036"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030114.2.2-036"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the situation in which Parliament found itself when it was asked to draft this report was not a propitious one, because the Commission had drafted its proposal for this regulation without waiting for either the result of conciliation on the Working Time Directive or the Council decision on the digital tachograph. Both documents are – as Mrs de Palacio said – obviously closely related, by virtue of their content, to this report.
I should like to thank Mr Andersson, who drafted the opinion of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs. We had a number of preliminary discussions together. Originally an Enhanced Hughes Procedure was announced, but a few months later this was dispensed with and responsibility for the report was transferred to the Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism.
My thanks also go to the Commission staff, Mr Darmis from the committee administration, many European and national institutions, which are affected by this regulation and have played an active part in the debate, and the shadow rapporteurs from the other groups. I believe that it was this cooperation that made it possible for a number of important compromise amendments to be adopted in the committee.
The regulation on the table has to take into account and interlink three different aspects. Firstly, improved road safety; secondly, social protection of workers, and thirdly, fair conditions of competition on the European Union's roads. I believe that a compromise between the groups has been successfully reached and that these three premises have been successfully integrated, although a few Members are proposing to reject the regulation. I would ask you not to comply with their wishes and instead to give the proposed draft the go-ahead.
What then are the most important points on which a majority of the committee has so far been able to agree? One, the regulation applies to all drivers of vehicles carrying goods or passengers by road, regardless of whether they are employed or self-employed. Two, the regulation also applies to vehicles from third countries when they are in the territory of the European Union. Three, the Commission is instructed to table this regulation for negotiation with the contracting parties to the AETR. Four, the concept of the flexible week that has been newly introduced by the Commission has not been confirmed and instead we retain the calendar week as a basis because this is more practical and easier to monitor. Five, the concept of 'driving time' has been defined by the committee so as to create greater legal certainty. Six – this is a very important point and I hope that it will be retained – all courier and express delivery services, which have contributed to a sharp increase in accidents in the transport sector, are included in the regulation. Seven, the daily rest period has been increased from the proposed 11 hours to 12 hours, although some flexibility is possible as it can be divided into two portions, of nine plus three hours, in a limited number of cases. Eight, the Member States are obliged to define a common range of sanctions to be applied in cases of infringement of the regulation, so as to harmonise the sanctions. Nine, the number of proposed checks on compliance with the regulation has been doubled. Ten, the transport undertakings are obliged to take the steps required to acquaint themselves with the total time worked, even where drivers are employed by several employers. Eleven, the Member States have to take the necessary measures to ensure that relations between shippers, forwarding agents, main customers and subcontractors are regulated by the adoption of binding contracts which enable compliance with the regulation to be monitored. Twelve, it was possible to delete some of the very numerous exemptions and also introduce some necessary new ones, such as, for example, for vintage vehicles and vehicles for humanitarian services.
Despite this considerable number of positive changes – and the ones I have mentioned are just a selection – there are also passages which I and a large proportion of my fellow Members are still not happy with. That is why several amendments have also been tabled in plenary and I would encourage you to support them.
In particular they concern the permitted driving time of 56 hours per week, which is unquestionably too high, although there is also a limit of not more than 90 hours in two weeks. We are proposing a maximum weekly driving time of 45 hours, which is still considerably more than the number of hours worked in almost any other branch of employment.
Secondly, I hope, like many of my fellow Members, that the number of exemptions in this regulation will be reduced still further. I know that this regulation does not fulfil all of the wishes of those affected, but I am convinced that the new legislation will increase road safety, improve the social conditions of those concerned, and that it will enable companies to do their job of providing high-quality transport services."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples