Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-07-02-Speech-3-262"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030702.7.3-262"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, we are evaluating today, at second reading, a package of measures designed to create a Single European Sky. Although I agree entirely with the aims of the proposals under discussion, I do have some concerns about their content, which I feel bound to share with this House. They stem, firstly, from the lack of a legal basis in the common transport policy for legislating in certain areas, especially those involving the military. Furthermore, they are rooted in the excessive and unnecessary curtailing of Member States’ sovereignty over their own airspace.
Allow me to mention three points which I believe are fundamental in this connection. The first relates to what I view as the Commission’s attempt to communitise the Member States’ airspace through the immediate creation of a single European flight region, on the basis of which the so-called ‘functional blocks’ will be established. I give my full support on this point to the Council’s common position, according to which the delineation of the functional blocks falls within the exclusive competence of the Member States and cannot be changed by the European Union.
Secondly, moving on to military matters, the Commission proposals allow for the possibility of subjecting military activities to rules for airspace management and use. Once again, I agree with the Council’s common position, which seems much more suitable and balanced, since it recognises that more efficient use of our airspace does indeed depend on closer cooperation between civilian and military organisations. In other words, the concept known as the ‘flexible use of airspace’ should be uniformly applied throughout the Single European Sky. This objective should always be pursued with due regard for national competences.
Finally, I would like to refer to the question of airspace management, and express my total disagreement with any approach seeking to make airspace management out to be just another economic service comparable to the liberalised telecommunications or transport markets supervised by a European regulatory body. I would argue, therefore, that each Member State should be completely free to designate the service provider for its own airspace, under the supervision of national regulatory authorities and without being answerable to any other organisations whatsoever."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples