Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-10-03-Speech-2-083"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20001003.3.2-083"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"The result of the voting in this House makes the objective of the directive – which was recognised and supported by all the speakers and the Commission – unattainable.
The rejection of Amendment No 3 means that, although the directive regulates maximum authorised lengths, it does not harmonise maximum authorised widths or heights for attachments such as skiboxes.
Much more crucial, however, is the fact that the testing rules for cornering are not aligned with the current version of ECE Regulation 36.03 which has been used in practice since 1996. Instead the reference is Directive 97/27/EC which is based on an obsolete version of ECE Regulation 36.03 and is undergoing review within the Commission. This is tantamount to failing to adapt to technical and scientific progress, and it means that an old testing method which is not fit to be used in practice will have to be applied. This will make it impossible to authorise the rigid 15-metre buses!
I voted in favour of the report in the hope that Directive 96/53/EC will be immediately brought into line with the amended Directive 97/27/EC (once it is updated).
The statement made by the Commission representative following the debate, that he will be rejecting all the other amendments apart from one, left me rather shaken. For me it shows how superfluous a debate is if the Commission is not willing or able to reconsider its position or react to the debate."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples