Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-02-12-Speech-1-061"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010212.4.1-061"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, the sinking of the oil tanker
off the French coast approximately one year ago has rightly exercised our minds a great deal. Less in the public and the political spotlight is another form of sea transport, namely, the transport of bulk goods, in particular, ores and coal. The consequences of the sinking of a ship in this category are actually less in terms of pollution, but the number of crew members who die as a result is considerably higher.
Fourthly: it is common knowledge that the capacity of the port State control, or PSC, in the Member States is inadequate. In this directive, the PSC authorities are at risk of being given extra tasks. For this reason, the Commission must see to it that these tasks are actually carried out.
Finally, a few more observations about Amendments Nos 14, 13 and 16. We have already seen that we must adhere as closely as possible to the text of the BLU Code in order to counteract distortion of competition and obscurities. Amendment No 14 does not tie in with this, however, and I therefore cannot support it. The necessary disquiet has arisen over Amendment No 13. The voyage data recorder is an instrument for recording travel data. Information about loading and unloading is not recorded on it. Furthermore, in the IMO, agreements have already been reached about the obligatory use of a voyage data recorder in bulk carriers. The effect of this can be found in the Erika II package. Apart from this, if there is a voyage data recorder on board a ship, then it is the responsibility of the port State control to inspect it and not that of the terminal operator. The latter does not have the knowledge for this. In brief, you should understand that I cannot support Amendment No 13 either. I hope that my fellow Members see the logic of this.
I am quite unable to support Amendment No 16 tabled by my fellow Members Mr Simpson and Mr Fava. It imposes requirements on ships from outside the European Union, which have not been internationally agreed. That is not legally possible. Anyway, work is being done on this. I hope that reassures those making the submission.
Mr President, if we accept this report, in a slightly amended form, I am of the opinion that we will have considerably improved the guarantees for the safety of bulk carriers and their crew.
Let us take a closer look at accidents involving bulk carriers: 146 accidents in the last ten years, in which 780 seamen drowned. Of the bulk carriers, 69% were more than fifteen years old. Two main reasons for these accidents are indicated. Firstly, the lack of expertise of the crew and secondly, the physical condition of the ship. In the majority of cases, a fault in the hull of bulk carriers is involved, caused by damage resulting from incorrect loading or unloading.
This problem is recognised at an international level. The International Maritime Organisation, the IMO, issued the Bulk Loading and Unloading Code, the BLU Code. This contains tasks both on ship and shore which are to be carried out before, during and after loading and unloading. The IMO urges all participating countries to declare the BLU Code applicable to the terminals in their country.
With the proposed directive, the Commission, on behalf of the Member States, wants to respond to this call. It intends to incorporate the BLU Code, with a few amendments, into Community legislation. The main points are firstly, the appointment of a terminal representative, secondly, the drawing up of a loading and unloading plan and thirdly, the right of intervention by the competent authorities in the event of a disagreement between ship and shore. Along with this, as an equivalent of the so-called "ISM Code" for ships – that is, a quality management system – the Commission also proposes to make a quality management system obligatory for the terminals.
The Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism thinks this proposal by the Commission is a step in the right direction. It will not prevent all accidents, seeing that fatal damage often arises outside the European Union. Nevertheless, it gives an impetus to the sector to proceed safely and cautiously and thus to prevent unnecessary damage. Precisely because the problem, like the sector, is of a global nature, an international solution is of great importance. We therefore support the incorporation of the BLU Code into Community legislation.
It is important that the text of the directive adheres as closely as possible to the BLU Code in order to prevent distortion of the competition between countries inside and outside the European Union. In spite of our endorsement of the Commission's proposal, a number of improvements need to be made to this proposal.
First of all, I should like to highlight the need to guarantee the safety of the crew, in view of the large number of casualties mentioned. Emphasis on that point in a few places in the text is in order.
A second point: the captain bears many responsibilities. It is also logical then that he is fully informed and that in the event of emergency repairs, his judgment forms the basis for the decision as to whether or not the ship should put to sea. For the rest, it is also important that classification societies receive reports about damage to bulk carriers, seeing that these bureaux often have to form their opinion about the condition of a ship. They can only do so if they have sufficient information at their disposal.
Thirdly, the role of the competent authority which is informed of or verifies irregularities during loading or unloading. It must be obliged to interrupt the procedure in order to guarantee the safety of the ship and crew."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples