Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-11-03-Speech-3-100"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.19991103.7.3-100"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"When the 1993 directive on working time was drawn up certain sectors were excluded from its remit and the reason is very clear. It is that the very specific characteristics of some of the sectors concerned required legislation that took these particular characteristics and needs into consideration.
I want to focus my remarks this evening on the fishing industry, and of course one of the sectors excluded is sea fishing. I share the Council’s view that flexibility in this sector is absolutely essential. Indeed I will go further and call for the exclusion of those workers who are involved in the processing of fresh fish – and I emphasise fresh fish – because there is no continuity of supply when we are dealing with fish. I believe the health and safety of workers must not be compromised. I am not suggesting that, but I believe that protection can best be accorded by an agreement between the two sides of the fishing and fresh fish processing industry. I cannot therefore accept Mr Hughes’ amendment which would place too many constraints on the fishing industry.
Fishermen must have sufficient holiday time and a maximum limit to working time but I am seriously concerned about the damage to the industry that could result from an inflexible attitude. I would like to stress that neither the fishing industry associations nor indeed any individual fishermen have approached me seeking to be included in the directive. This is an industry which I like to believe that I have a particular affinity to, and appreciation of, coming from a maritime constituency in the north-west of Ireland where fishing is a crucial part of the local economy. My concern is with the families of those trying to make a living. I would call on Mr Hughes and those who feel they want to vote for his amendment to take common sense into consideration.
In conclusion, I want to take the opportunity to refer to the other group – the junior doctors. The hours that this dedicated group of individuals currently has to work in Ireland are unacceptably long. They need to be brought under the correct protection of the directive and I fully support Amendment No 5 calling for a maximum transition period of five years."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples