Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-10-23-Speech-2-079"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011023.5.2-079"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
". – Mr President, on behalf of the Commission I would like to congratulate Mrs Thorning-Schmidt for her excellent report particularly because it is such a difficult technical issue: It is not only that is a difficult dossier, but it has been before the Council since 1994 and only now are things on the move.
To conclude, the Commission can accept in full Amendments Nos 3, 4 and 7. It can accept in part Amendments Nos 1, 5 and 6 and it rejects Amendments Nos 2, 8, 9, 11, 12 and 13.
I consider that this legislation on vibrations will be a fundamental step to achieving better protection of the health and safety of workers exposed to risks arising from physical agents, but of course, we have to take into account the economic impact, the impact in the enterprises – the small, medium and large. That is why we propose a step-by-step approach.
We cannot forget that a considerable number of workers suffer from the effects of their exposure to vibrations, notably neurological, vascular and musculo-skeletal disorders. This is a particularly serious problem which is costly for business and society and which, more importantly, causes suffering for the people directly involved as well as for their families, and when we discuss costs, we must calculate the cost that enterprises have because of the health problems of their workers.
On your amendments, the Commission has worked very hard to maintain a high level of protection while, at the same time, ensuring that a compromise could be reached. Although we consider that lower values more in line with the amended proposal would be more appropriate, we have accepted the Council's common position with a view to achieving a global compromise. The common position increases the exposure limit values and exposure action values for the whole-body vibrations and introduces new provisions on transitional periods for existing work equipment in general and for equipment used in the agricultural and forestry sectors in particular.
For reasons of consistency, the Commission cannot therefore accept Amendment No 2, which decreases the exposure values for whole-body vibrations in the common position, nor the part of Amendment No 5 which reduces the length of the transitional periods. However, the last part of Amendment No 5 would be acceptable if slightly redrafted.
Similarly, the Commission cannot accept Amendments Nos 8 and 12 because they merely restate the principles of the employer's responsibility already contained in the Framework Directive without additional added value, nor Amendments Nos 9 and 13 since they either remove the possibility for Member States to grant derogations on whole-body vibrations in case of seasonal work or simply allow for the averaging of exposures which is already considered by the ISO standards to which the directive refers.
The Commission cannot accept Amendment No 11 for both technical and political reasons. Although the Commission agrees with the principles behind the changes proposed by Amendment No 1, we can only agree with the first part but we cannot accept the second part which foresees the commitment of both the European Parliament and the Council to continue with the adoption of other parts of the original physical agents proposal. This is not a question of political disagreement. This part of the recital contravenes the rule that the recitals 'shall not contain normative provisions or political exhortations'. I accept Amendments Nos 3, 4 and 7. These amendments clearly improve and clarify the text.
I regret that I have to reject Amendment No 6 as it stands. Nevertheless, I could accept the idea of justifications to be provided by Member States on any transitional periods or derogations granted by them. This should however be integrated in Article 14 (1).
Finally, let me remind you that the step-by-step approach we have used, starting with vibrations, implies that we should now push ahead with the remaining three physical agents included in the Commission's original proposal: noise, electromagnetic fields and optical radiation."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples