Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-09-23-Speech-2-283"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080923.36.2-283"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, President-in-Office of the Council, Commissioner, I share the other rapporteurs’ hope that we are close to adopting this important legislation. I think it strange that it should take the Council so long to come up with a common position on the seven directives that are intended to prevent maritime pollution disasters and also to reinforce preparedness for when things go wrong.
It is regrettable that we have failed for so long with regard to the two directives on the obligations of flag States and the liability of rescue workers. In my opinion, this too must be included in the overall package. Several others have said, and I agree, that the French Presidency is making wholehearted efforts to seek a solution, for which I should like to thank the Presidency on behalf of the Group of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe. Let us hope that these efforts will be crowned with success.
We all agree, of course, that shipping is a global industry, and so the legislation we adopt must be compatible with the international maritime agreements under the auspices of the IMO and under the Paris Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control. Parliament has supported this all along. The third maritime safety package is intended to make coffin ships a thing of the past in European waters. There must be better traffic monitoring, better quality control of ships and better exchange of experience on what constitutes an incident risk.
The issue of ports of refuge has been a bone of contention between Parliament and the Council. In fact, I myself live near a port that has been designated a port of refuge, and I must give my clear support to Parliament’s requirement that ports of refuge must be protected from an unpleasant additional bill in the event that a ship leaking oil is towed into port. It is important to ensure that it is not small local communities who are left with the financial burden of any subsequent clean-up operation.
I should like to highlight in particular two directives for which I have been the rapporteur for my group, namely the Directive on port State control and the Directive on the investigation of accidents. With regard to the Directive on port State control, a consensus is emerging on the principles proposed by the Commission, namely that all ships must be inspected, and that ships in poor condition must be inspected extra thoroughly. Port State control must meet a suitable standard in order to render controls more uniform in all EU ports. There are still some sticking points, however. The Council has not accepted the inspection of ships at anchor, nor is its stance as firm as Parliament’s on refusal of access for the very worst ships. The ALDE Group fully supports the position of the rapporteur, Mrs Vlasto, and thus backs the reintroduction of a number of first reading proposals.
There are also a few points on which Parliament and the Council still disagree regarding the Directive on the investigation of accidents. Incident investigations and the communication of their results should ensure that accidents are not repeated. We have to learn from the accidents that do take place, and as many people as possible must learn from each other’s experiences. As in aviation, it must be ensured that all parties involved provide as open and honest an account of the course of the accident as possible. A witness statement to the investigative inquiry must not be used in direct connection with any charge made as, in such cases, the accused must be granted proper rights during questioning. It is a difficult balance to strike, and there are some suggestions from Parliament’s first proposal that the Council has not accepted, which we are therefore reintroducing. The main bone of contention, however, is the issue of which types of incident should be covered. The Council wishes to include only the most serious accidents, but it may well be equally valuable to learn from minor accidents, indeed even near-misses. In addition, the Council actually wants to give equivalent status to parallel investigations carried out by several countries, whereas we want some clarity regarding which investigation is considered the official one. It must be avoided at all costs that an accident investigation is politicised and the authorities seek to disclaim responsibility and influence the outcome of the investigations.
The ALDE Group thus wholeheartedly supports Mr Kohlíček’s proposal to reintroduce the first reading proposal."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples