Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-03-10-Speech-1-100"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030310.5.1-100"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, we have already debated this directive on opening up all port services to competition at the first reading. Everyone has commented on it. The Council subsequently made its position known. We are faced with a liberal directive which, as usual, seeks solely to reduce costs, to the detriment of all other factors. Even though the rapporteur, Mr Jarzembowski, has met with a large number of people and has included a number of proposed improvements, the situation, the fundamental problem remains. There has been no genuine consultation with unions or others involved, despite the fact that these people are familiar with the safety and environmental requirements and have invaluable know-how. Furthermore, the fact that we are continuing to legislate against those employed in this sector was demonstrated this afternoon through the formidable dock workers’ demonstration. In this respect, I support the protest made by Mr Wurtz, the chairman of my group, to the effect that the attitude of the police towards the demonstrators was unacceptable. As he said, their protest is legitimate. Considering that their trade and their jobs are being destroyed, we cannot expect them to come to the European institutions bearing flowers.
In addition, no prior assessment has been made of the effects of this liberalisation, especially as regards important issues such as employment, safety and the environment. According to my fellow Member, Mr Hatzidakis, liberalisation is not an aim in itself, but a means of economic development. Well, I am waiting for an evaluation! I want to know the impact of this on other sectors. We have been waiting for a while now. Regardless of the amendments incorporated, the text remains liberal. Whether we like it or not, self-handling at ports will be tantamount to permitting social dumping, despite the various safeguard clauses included. These refer to safety, to the qualifications required of staff and even to the nature of the seagoing personnel. This directive makes it possible to employ workers from outside the port to do the work of the qualified workers currently employed. The concept of self-handling will result in insecurity, worse working and employment conditions and worse environmental safety standards. This is a particularly retrograde step in light of the current practices of commercial fleets, which have shown that the consequences may be very serious for the European Union.
Employees like dock workers fulfil a very important economic role in difficult conditions while maintaining safety standards. Services such as pilotage and mooring services are not covered by this directive, even though they are universally recognised as being services of general interest. I think all these sectors should be considered as partners in the pursuit of sustainable development.
Lastly, following the damage caused by the
I met with professionals from the maritime sector in France to discuss safety issues. They all insisted that maritime safety begins at ports. I therefore feel that the measures taken here after the sinking of the
and the decision taken today to impose self-handling are totally contradictory. These, then, are the reasons why my group will continue to advocate rejection of the common position."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples