Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-11-13-Speech-2-188"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011113.9.2-188"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, over the next few years the present directive will determine the operation of our ports, which will play an ever more important role in trade traffic on account of ever increasing traffic flows among other things. Unlike in the past, modern port users are uncommitted: they choose their port on the basis of price and quality.
There are important financial channels that run from authorities to port companies. A need for more insight into the investment flows has arisen. In addition, a level playing field is needed for all interested parties. This situation could be improved by setting up a number of basic rules. I should like to highlight a few aspects in this context.
First of all, there is the scope of the directive. It does not simply cover the port itself, but mainly the port users. Deleting cargo handling from the directive will not benefit the quality of the service which ports offer their customers. Freight services, or cargo handling, should simply remain in the directive.
Secondly, ship services, also referred to as pilotage and towage services. Amendments Nos 3, 14 and 51 aim to keep pilotage outside the scope of the directive, based on the outmoded notion that pilotage services are always public services. I will not support these amendments. In my country, pilotage services have not been a public service for a very long time, and that has worked out very well.
A directive which regulates market access to port services therefore covers both ship and port services. Needless to say, we must move towards more transparency of the financial flows with regard to infrastructure, but I should like to leave the powers where they are, and will therefore vote in favour of Mr Sterckx’ Amendment No 47 in which the Commission is still being requested to submit proposals in this field.
What matters is that ports facilitate reshipment and receiving companies. Ports and their users deserve solid, well-thought-out legislation. I regret that the way in which this directive has been dealt with in Parliament has created unnecessary tension between northern, southern and western Europe."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples