Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-05-15-Speech-2-338"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010515.13.2-338"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, we are reminded daily of the need to achieve results speedily in the area of maritime safety. Only this week there was another accident involving a cement freighter in the so-called Kadetrenden channel in the Baltic Sea between Denmark and Germany. The delicate-sounding names of the ships, like
or
should not blind us to the fact that in European waters there are all too many unseaworthy rust-buckets plying about. As someone who lives on the German coast all I can say is: enough is enough!
The present proposal, which is now before us for its second reading, is a part of the so-called ERIKA-1-package named after the first, very competent proposals of the Commission in response to the accident involving the tanker
off the coast of Brittany. When we concluded the first reading, we were full of optimism, inspired by the Commission’s new-found élan, and we believed that our amendments would be – must be – approved by the Council too, because speedy implementation was supposed to follow. But then things do not usually happen quite as one expects them to.
Today, unfortunately, we are not much further on. And yet the recommendations of Parliament were entirely reasonable and this was reflected in the common position. Unfortunately, it was not then possible to reach a positive outcome early in the context of the three-way discussion. I say early, I mean of course in logical sequence! I very much regret this because avoiding a conciliation procedure would have speeded up the entry into force of the regulations. Can anyone possibly understand the Council’s blockade any more? There is no doubt that we need a practicable and fair solution to the issue of the liability of classification societies, and one that is also appropriate in terms of competition. We need to have ceilings for financial liability and the amounts need to be insurable. I therefore welcome the proposals relating to this. We must not forget that the issue of liability is not a question of one-sided apportioning of blame. All players involved must bear their recoverable share of the responsibility.
This, of course, is expressed in the form of a greater duty of care – from the shipbuilder to the ship-owner – than has hitherto been the case, and also in concrete sums of money. I say we ought at long last to take a step forwards in the interests of safety. I call upon the Council to support the Commission and us and make its own contribution actively and visibly in the interests of safety."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples