Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-01-28-Speech-3-076"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040128.7.3-076"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, as the elections approach, I am increasingly being asked whether Parliament actually amounts to anything, and whether it really does have anything to say. I think that this dossier is a case in point, and I shall discuss this in more detail. The Council and the Commission initially had very great ambitions, particularly after 11 September, but these gradually evaporated. There were all kinds of sensitivities regarding sovereignty and legal hurdles; in short, the Council did not dare to make a bold move, and Parliament clearly took a different perspective.
We have a clear aim, which is increased integration in European airspace in the interests of the citizen. That is necessary, and, in consultation with the Council, we finally obtained a clear commitment on their part to achieve that aim, too. This is a first step in the right direction. The main points that we agreed with the Council in conciliation were on the subject of implementation, of course. Service providers must comply with stringent requirements, and this compliance must be monitored. Conflicts of interests must be eliminated, and access to services must be guaranteed for all airspace users: including military, I should like to add. I think that it is important for that to be pursued by the European Parliament.
We also reached agreement on the charging regimes. Incentives can be used to promote a better use of airspace. There must be a decrease in subsidies, and, furthermore, everything must be made more transparent. We have also pushed for clarity as regards the future. When shall we see legislation regarding the licensing of air-traffic controllers? At what point might the concepts of the Single Sky in the upper airspace also be applicable to lower airspace? We should like some certainty on those points. In addition, we think it is a good thing that Eurocontrol has become involved with this; it has worked very hard on this, and indeed I believe that the discussion on this dossier has focused everyone’s attention, which is all to the good.
The second point on which there was a difference of opinion was, of course, civil-military cooperation. I think Mr Fava’s greatest achievement was to succeed in securing the inclusion in the text of a clear reference to the need for this kind of cooperation. Parliament is committed to this, and emphasised it continually in the course of the negotiations. Indeed, this could perhaps be a stepping-stone to more and better military cooperation in the future. We in this House also succeeded in making clear the importance of data exchange; again, that applies to all – including military – service providers. We are also pleased that the Member States have committed themselves to cooperating on the concept of the flexible use of airspace across national borders: that will prevent many delays. Mr Fava has already discussed this in detail.
Finally, there is the point on which conciliation nearly foundered: cross-border airspace blocks. I think that we have reached a reasonable compromise in the form of Article 5(6). Speaking personally, I think this was one of the most important points, because, if progress is to be made, provision for conflict mediation has to be included in the text, otherwise it is all too easy to hide behind someone else. Having invested a great deal of effort in this on behalf of my colleagues, I am fairly pleased with the outcome. The Member States are obliged to take the views of the Commission into consideration, and they must also take those views as the basis for resolving conflicts over the creation of cross-border airspace blocks. What helped win us over was the Commission’s pledge, in the form of a written statement, to take action to review the procedure after five years if no clear progress has been made with the reorganisation of the airspace. This provides the impetus that is vital in order to make European airspace safer and more efficient. This is important for service providers, airspace users, and, of course, passengers. It is also essential in view of the current increase in air traffic of more than 2% per annum.
Commissioner, you can be assured that the European Parliament has acted in the interests of the citizen and that we shall closely monitor the progress made and take action if the Member States are found wanting.
It only remains for me to thank my colleagues for their excellent cooperation and the services for their support. Negotiations with the Council may well have been tough, but they were also congenial and constructive throughout, with each party understanding the other’s views; and that is the way it should be, too. It has been an honour to do my share towards making air transport safer and more efficient in the interests of the citizen. I should also like to take this opportunity to point out how important the role of the European Parliament has been, because I think that, together with the Council, we have achieved a very good proposal."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples