Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-06-18-Speech-3-425"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080618.29.3-425"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I should like to respond to the comments made by a large number of Members during the course of this debate. The attendance of so many Members, despite the late hour, reflects the extraordinary importance of the topic and the fact that everyone regards it as a priority.
I find it regrettable that Mr Nattrass spoke and then left the Chamber, because when one asks questions it is a good idea to listen to the answers, even from a Commissioner who has been through many elections and has been elected to the European Parliament several times; and I can assure you, ladies and gentlemen, that it is much more difficult to be elected to the European Parliament under the Italian system than it is in the United Kingdom. However, I did not wish to engage in polemics; that was just a little quip, and let us hope that Mr Nattrass is listening in his office. Nonetheless, perhaps he has not been sufficiently attentive in his reading of the legislative text under discussion this evening. The legislative text we are discussing this evening makes no demands on the United Kingdom nor on Germany, because the procedures contained in the directive are specifically inspired by the UK and German systems. I therefore believe that Mr Nattrass will be able to alter his stance if he rereads the text carefully.
With regard to the request made by Mrs Ticău, Mr Kuc and Mrs Ayala Sender for safe car parks, I fully agree – I alluded to this during the speech I made when seeking the confidence of the Committee on Transport – and the Valenciennes initiative is a first step. I plan to go further, not least because the results have clearly been positive. Many Members, including some from the new Member States, have asked me to take action above all at the border with Russia because lorries are being vandalised there. I consequently believe that action is required there too, and the pilot project launched by the Commission must be continued. As far as I am concerned, then, I am committed to going further in this direction.
In conclusion, I must say that sometimes the good is the enemy of the best, and when we manage to produce a legislative text which may perhaps prompt reservations but on which there is a consensus, we can consider ourselves satisfied. Once again, I am grateful to Mr Markov. The directive undoubtedly represents a fair compromise. Some may perhaps have preferred a regulation, but Member States which have already introduced the procedures we are discussing will not be obliged to change them – and I reiterate this point – while Member States without experience in this area will be able to benefit from the exchange of good practice fostered by the directive, which has hitherto been insufficient. Moreover, the results of the research projects will be available to Member States so as to enable them to implement the directive in full.
Mr Markov, I shall conclude by thanking you once again for your patience and for the mediating skills you have demonstrated. You are obviously a good politician. Thank you, and thank you, Mr President.
First of all, I wish to thank Mr Markov for his work. It cannot have been easy, but a good politician must be able to use the skill of mediation. It seems to me that Mr Markov has used it, achieving a result that can certainly be endorsed by the Commission.
Concerning the Commission's proposals referred to by Mrs Sommer, I believe that at the hearing, during my policy statement the other evening, I emphasised the importance of the Commission’s, but also Parliament’s, commitment to the sensitive subject of road safety. I wish to make it a priority, even though it is not entirely within the Commission's competence, as I believe that our consciences as fathers compel us to engage in a major initiative to drastically reduce the number of deaths on the roads.
That is why I wish to turn the event planned by the Commission for 10 July in Brussels as a meeting with young people not into a formal affair but into a special occasion, if possible with a high media profile, by inviting members of the public to describe the risks they run on the roads each day, and in particular the risks run by our young people.
I should also like to respond to what Mr Matsakis said: I share his view about alcohol. Alcohol and drugs are two elements that endanger the lives of too many young people on roads all over Europe. That is why I invite you to attend the event for young people on 10 July. We must inform them in no uncertain terms of the risks they run, especially when leaving discotheques in the evening and nightclubs at the weekend.
Thereafter, European Road Safety Day will be marked in cities on 13 October. The Commission is making preparations in Paris, but also in other European cities. Let us see to it, with the participation of Members of this House, that these are not just passing phenomena but days that convey positive messages to young people. If we are able to save even one human life, that good deed will stay with us for the rest of our lives. That is why we must make a commitment and why I become so heated about this issue, which, I repeat, I consider to be a priority in the transport sector and a crucial aspect of my duties.
The translation is perhaps easier when I speak in French. I would like to thank Mrs Griesbeck for saying that she was very pleased that I spoke in French, but as I first went to Paris when I was six months old I was speaking French before I could speak Italian. However, I shall now continue in Italian.
Mrs
Lichtenberger said that human error is undoubtedly to blame. I did say in my speech that human error is certainly the main factor, but just think how many poorly constructed roads cause accidents: we only need think of aquaplaning. A badly made road is so often all it takes to cause the death of a person who may have been travelling at a normal speed merely because some of the structural elements are faulty. I agree with Mr Matsakis and welcome his technical advice regarding stopping distances and the use of special materials for road surfaces. We must send out signals, positive messages. I do not think one should speak of interference by the European Union whenever a positive message is conveyed."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples