Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-04-20-Speech-2-040"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040420.2.2-040"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I would like, firstly, to congratulate the rapporteur, Mr Sterckx, although he is not present, to congratulate Mr Jarzembowski for his magnificent work as chairman of the committee and to congratulate you all, ladies and gentlemen, for your speeches and for your work to take this committee forward and make it work.
In this case, what is happening is that the judge on duty is taking precautions as there is some very specific background that is particularly unfavourable in terms of the behaviour, at least in this case, in a very similar situation, of some companies that are particularly involved.
As one of you, ladies and gentlemen, said a short while ago, although the majority of crews, captains and officers are reliable, reasonable and respectable people, there are exceptions.
I will now comment on spills. The great disasters, according to the statistics, represent less than 10% of marine pollution. Most pollution, although it is true that it is more diluted and, therefore, less visible, is continuous spillage, bilge cleaning, the cleaning carried out on the open seas by unscrupulous vessels. In this respect, I would like once more to thank this Parliament for the backing it has given to the Commission proposal to penalise those who voluntarily cause this sort of pollution of our seas. Regrettably, the Council is not in favour, which is causing problems.
This proposal, as Mr Poignant has said, includes such subjects as traceability and sensors to monitor how the large vessels that put into our ports manage dumping and bilge cleaning. All this is also in line with the measure that we previously adopted for harbour installations to collect waste and to allow the vessels putting into European ports to carry out cleaning within these installations.
Fifth, I agree with Mr Ortuondo Larrea that the classification societies have a great responsibility. The classification societies should be the guarantee and, in this respect, Mr De Ruiter, the European Maritime Safety Agency and also the Commission are monitoring and analysing their behaviour because, as you know, ladies and gentlemen, we have increased the responsibility of the classification societies following the
disaster and we can even withdraw their power to recognise and certify vessels in relation to European ports. We are working on it and I agree completely on its importance, as well as the chain of responsibilities that another of you indicated previously comprising the maritime transport operator, the ship owner – not only the captain, who also is responsible – and the various elements appearing in the transport chain. This must be done, however, not only at European Union level, but also at the level of the International Maritime Organisation.
With that, we arrive at the sixth point of my intervention. We are talking about an entirely international and globalised activity. In this respect, we can adopt a series of measures at European regional level, but there are other measures that can only be adopted, or will only have any real effect if adopted, at international level. This comprises our fight against flags of convenience, although to some degree we are already penalising them, because of the criteria by which the vessels that must undergo port controls are selected. The flying of certain flags automatically causes that vessel to be a priority control objective and, therefore, it is moored for longer and experiences more problems, etc. Therefore, to a certain extent, we are already looking at this problem, but we will only be able to go further when at international level, which is what we are pushing for, all questions of auditing and of the responsibility of the Member States issuing the flag are clearly reinforced.
The minimum rules regarding crews are also international. In this respect, the International Labour Organization must make progress regarding the qualifications and training of maritime personnel, not only for European crews, but also for international crews that put into our ports in vessels from third countries and to whom our European regulations cannot be applied. It is, however, clear that we require the seafarers and the crews of our vessels to have undergone training that makes them much safer. We simply have to compare the reality of the accidents in vessels with a European flag with that of third-country vessels.
It is necessary to continue this work and, in fact, throughout this legislature we have established and adopted measures to strengthen and improve the quality of crews and also the prestige of maritime work, making it more attractive, making it a viable life option for our young people to join a merchant ship as a seafarer, officer or captain. In this respect I think that, for example, during the Greek Presidency, a series of measures were taken and I hope that there will be a commitment on the part of the British Presidency to take up all these initiatives that we are working on to make the occupation of sailor more attractive to young people in the European Union.
You are aware, ladies and gentlemen, that the coastguard problem is important to the Commission, but we know that for now it will not be resolved. For this reason, we must back what is attainable at the moment: greater cooperation and coordination between the coastguards of the different Member States and, of course, an expansion of the role of the European Maritime Safety Agency.
Very recently, we adopted a regulation to amend the powers of this Agency, including the power to manage anti-pollution activities in the event of accidents, in order to be able to tackle them by means of European measures that are equal to any needs that may arise, but we have also expanded its powers in the spheres of safety and security
I would start by requesting, ladies and gentlemen, that we all be fair and that we try to be a bit impartial. If we must be critical, we must go back much further, as before the
before the
unfortunately, the European coastlines had been polluted, assaulted, by a series of dreadful accidents. I would recall the
off the Breton coast, or the
off the Galician coast, to name but two cases previous to those cited, which are as alike as two peas in a pod. At that time, dreadful disasters took place and nothing was done, ladies and gentlemen.
I would appreciate it, therefore, if we had financial backing in the budgetary debate, because we are discussing financing for 2005 and we need funds to be able to establish the anti-pollution measures and, specifically, the cleaning vessels we were discussing.
I will finish on a very clear issue, directed at Mr Gorostiaga Atxalandabaso. Look, Mr Gorostiaga, you know as well as I that I will be able to come here. Aralar upholds the same ideals as your party, apart from the fact that it condemns terrorism. You know that your political party has been declared illegal by the judgment of a judge in Spain, not by a government decision. It is true that this judge was basing his judgment on legislation adopted democratically and legitimately by over 90% of the Spanish Congress of Members and that, from that moment, your approach is defensible, but what is indefensible, not only from the point of view of the Spanish, but also of Europeans, is not condemning a very specific example of terrorism, that of ETA. In this respect, I would like to remind you that your party has been considered a terrorist organisation by the European Union by means of a decision of June 2003.
In this respect, we can feel proud that now something has been done. This time has been different from that time, in the eighties and nineties, when nothing was done, whilst, for example, the United States, following the
disaster, took a series of measures that now allow them to assert that their coastlines are much safer, given that there can never be zero risk.
I must say that, as a politician, the past only interests me in order to be able to avoid repeating mistakes and look towards the future. The future is where we are and this is what we are all working on together.
In this respect, we can be satisfied and say that in the future, in current reality, the European coastlines are safer than four years ago. We can be satisfied with everyone’s participation, and the Commission is aware of the joint effort we have made.
I must also say that the Council has taken the corresponding steps forward. It is, however, true that the decision of the Commission and Parliament has been much more systematically clear than that of the Council. I am not referring to each of the countries of the Council, as they have different sensibilities, but to the Council as a whole.
To move on the issues relating to the true situation of Community law, we are first of all monitoring the timetable closely. When the months envisaged for transposition come to an end, any Member State that does not report the transposition of a regulation will be summonsed to legal proceedings before the Court of Justice of the European Communities in Luxembourg. I have told you, ladies and gentlemen, we have already initiated a series of proceedings in some Member States.
Second, regarding the reality of internal application, even when the transposition has been carried out, we are, thanks to the European Maritime Safety Agency – we have present here today its Executive Director, Mr De Ruiter, who is doing a fantastic job – making systematic inspections
. This allows us to verify whether, as well as incorporating a certain number of rules into national law, this is also reflected in practice. We will also produce the appropriate and relevant reports.
Third, you have asked about the situation of Captain Mangouras. Look, ladies and gentlemen, the Commission is not able to intervene in the legal systems of the Member States. Neither can the governments intervene in the legal decisions of the Member States. There is a separation of powers. In this respect, I suspect, as has already been indicated, that a political change in the Spanish Government will have little effect on the opinion of the judge on duty. It would be catastrophic and disastrous if the judge on duty were to obey the political impulses of the ideals of the government in power. I would find it regrettable and I am sure that the judge on duty is doing his job. In this regard, consider the precedents, such as the fact that the captain of the
I would like to remind this House that this was a vessel whose owners were very close relatives of the owners of the
as close as brothers and brothers-in-law – who was responsible 14 years ago for a catastrophe similar to that of the
on the Spanish coastline, left without allowing them to bring him to justice, because he took advantage of his bail to, quite simply, get on a plane and never again set foot in Spain."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples