Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-06-13-Speech-3-143"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010613.4.3-143"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, I will start by saying that our Group warmly supports all the arguments and all the amendments which the rapporteur, Mr Hughes, has produced for this second reading.
I am going to take this opportunity to highlight the problem of independent workers, because I believe that the good intentions on the health and safety of mobile workers, which the Commission and the Council are boasting of, may have horrendous effects if obstacles continue to be placed in the way of including independent workers in the Directive.
It is a fact, ladies and gentlemen, and not an opinion, that the three basic principles put forward to justify the need for the Directive – the health and safety of workers, road safety and fair competition – are mere words if we exclude independent workers. It could even be said that the health and safety of the majority of workers in countries such as mine, who are self-employed, are not of the least concern to us if we exclude them from this Directive.
The Council has the opportunity to avoid responsibility for situations such as those which arise in my country, where more than 400 drivers lose their lives every year, without distinguishing between self-employed and salaried workers. This figure is increasing by 20% per year. Why are we only going to take account of the risk facing a minority of these drivers? ‘Are the self-employed not people?’, as Mrs Smet asked. Of course they are. Why forget about the majority? Do those drivers and citizens who use the roads not face identical risks?
Let us be serious. If we really want road safety and the health and safety of workers, it makes little difference whether they are self-employed or salaried. Independent workers are not another race. In fact, they have more work to do than the salaried workers. They have to look after their lorries, their businesses, they have to load and unload, adding these tasks to their maximum hours, while salaried workers deduct all of this from their maximum hours.
As if this argument were not enough, ladies and gentlemen, and if we want to consider the question of free competition, of fair competition, please bear in mind that salaried drivers are going to spend fewer hours driving, the lorries they drive are going to make shorter daily trips and they will arrive later at their destinations. How competitive are those companies going to be in comparison with those companies whose conditions are much tougher and much less economically burdensome? So our conclusion is that excluding self-employed workers is going to have horrendous effects for these workers and also for the sector.
For all of these reasons, we urge the Council to add to the effort that it has already made and include independent workers, if it truly – and this is not pure rhetoric – wishes to protect the health and safety of all drivers, increase road safety, promote fair competition at Community level and not destroy the sector. It should do so if it wants to protect jobs and companies and, if it wants, in summary, the directive that we deserve in the 21st Century."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples