Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-04-11-Speech-1-141"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050411.18.1-141"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I wish to begin by explaining to the House that in his opening remarks my fellow countryman, Mr Nattrass, was confusing the application of the Working Time Directive to the transport industry with this directive. As for the rest of his rantings, they were as incomprehensible to me as they were to everybody else, and I notice that he has not bothered to stay for the rest of the debate.
I welcome this directive because, as the Commissioner said, the current proposals are 20 years old. A lot has changed in that time: the abolition of frontiers, the single customs document and better roads, which means you can now drive for long periods of time without any natural interruption. We have an EU of 25 Member States, covering 1.5 million square miles of territory. Therefore it is vital for road safety to have a consistent set of rules across the European Union. It is currently possible to drive for up to 8 hours and 59 minutes with only a 15-minute break. That is unacceptable: tiredness kills, and failing to modernise these proposals would be irresponsible.
However, it is important that the legislation be workable and enforceable, not only simply, but also consistently across the EU. Therefore, I welcome Parliament’s proposals to require new vehicles to be fitted with digital tachographs at least from 2006. The Commission is wrong to insist stubbornly on its position, given that only two out of the three potential tachograph suppliers are able to test pre-production models at the moment and are not able to go into full production.
It is important that the break periods be simple and easy to understand and that a degree in mathematics is not required to apply them! It is also important to have derogation for essential services delivered in the interests of the public, no matter the nature of the body that delivers those services.
I welcome the committee’s proposals on bus and coach services, provided that we can differentiate between the leisure industry and the express-coach industry.
However, I still remain to be convinced that certain proposals can be enforced and understood. I recognise the problems with the express-vehicle industry but I am not sure how these proposals can be enforced. I do not think retrofitting digital tachographs is feasible at a cost that most people could afford. I also question whether it would be possible to scrutinise the application of the Working Time Directive in this directive, given that most of the records would be held back at base and not in the lorry concerned."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples