Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-01-18-Speech-2-130"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000118.5.2-130"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Torrey Canyon, Olympic Bravery, Haven, Amoco Cadiz, Gino, Tanio, so many names we remember with horror. And now the Erika. Whose turn is next? Twenty one years after Amoco Cadiz, this umpteenth oil slick, the seventh since 1967, shows the irresponsibility of our successive rulers. The Atlantic West Coast once again is paying a high price for their inability to react, for their capitulation to the multinationals. It is hard to understand why the French and the Europeans allow something which the Americans refuse to accept, and why Europe, normally so quick to pass environmental legislation, has chosen to overlook the matter of maritime safety. And this is the result. The Erika, a vessel flying a Maltese flag, a floating rust bucket, classed amongst the most dangerous type of oil tankers, has contaminated more than 400 km of our coastline, a case of pollution even worse than that caused by the Amoco Cadiz. As an elected representative for the Loire-Atlantique region, unfortunately, I can testify to this. There is nothing natural about these recurring disasters, they are the result of fate. They are the result of human thoughtlessness. What we have here is an ecological disaster. Only the people cut off from the harsh reality of the grass roots could have any doubt about that. It is also an economic disaster for all the people who make their living from the sea and from tourism, fishermen, oyster farmers, shellfish farmers, people who make a living from the salt marshes, shopkeepers, etc.
The Erika disaster must be the last in the series. First of all, we must shed some light on this shipwreck. Why do we not appoint a parliamentary committee of inquiry or get Members of Parliament involved in the team of experts which has just been announced by the Commission? Next, as a matter of urgency, we muss pass legislation, firstly, regarding identification of the exact characteristics of goods transported. In fact, according to the experts, the oil the Erika was carrying was supposed to sink to the bottom and should never have reached the coast. We know what actually happened. Next, reliable technical inspection must be established like the technical inspection compulsory in France for vehicles more than five years old. We must regulate the use of flags of convenience, make double hulls mandatory for the transport of polluting or dangerous materials, work on technological innovations in order to be able to process or recover hydrocarbons at sea. This would be a minimum requirement, I believe, on the dawn of the third millennium. Non-compliant vessels must be denied access to European waters, the responsibility of polluters, shipowners or charterers must be determined in line with the principle of the “polluter pays”, maritime supervision must be strengthened to prevent any degassing, thorough and reliable inspection of tankers must be required, an appropriate “natural disasters” budget line must be re-established for Member States and, in the meantime, Community aid released on an exceptional basis and the French departments affected by the disaster should be made eligible for Structural Funds. I have also tabled a resolution on this subject on behalf of the EDD Group."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples