Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-12-18-Speech-3-114"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021218.6.3-114"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, I was particularly disappointed by the outcome of the Copenhagen Summit on the issues of safety at sea. What do the conclusions say? The European Council merely expresses regret and its grave concern at the consequences of the sinking of the
and assures Galicia of its support. These statements are very revealing. Where are the concrete measures? Why do we still feel that the ministers are stalling?
I would like to express my anger, as you did, Commissioner, as well as my extreme concern regarding the fact that no genuinely practical decisions have been taken. The Council reiterated its conclusions of December 2000 regarding the measures to take with regard to the
. How much progress has been made in implementing these measures? What is happening with port controls? What is being done to ensure the integrity of those who enforce these controls? How far have we come in banning flags of convenience? What is the status of the European list
of ports that are likely to receive doomed ships? The Council must deliver an opinion on this as soon as possible. Lastly, what is being done to establish the responsibilities of owners and charterers?
What we are waiting for is the Council to give us appropriate answers to these specific questions. How much longer are we going to wait? How many more disasters must happen?
On the other hand, I congratulate the Commission on its determination and I pledge the European Parliament’s support. A committee of enquiry, however, will not help, as we already have a legislative package and a committee would be a waste of our time. The political will of the Fifteen Member States is essential. We must work quickly instead of spending more time talking. If the directives adopted by this House had been supported, if the Commission had been supported, we would not be in this situation. Europe could have and should have prevented the
disaster.
Ladies and gentlemen, we do need to pass more legislation; what we must do, at long last, is to apply existing legislation. We do not need to have one debate after another. We must take action. Subsidies will not help to repair the environmental damage. The environment must be preserved. What use are our directives on protection?
I would also point out that it is more profitable from an economic point of view to anticipate than to repair. Then the disastrous social consequences are so difficult to quantify. Whichever country is affected, how does one assess the distress of fishermen, of those working in the tourism industry and of those citizens who see the oil slick spread further every day?"@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples