Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-01-16-Speech-3-237"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020116.16.3-237"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"First of all, I should like to thank the three rapporteurs for the volume of work they have carried out. I should particularly like to congratulate Mr Van Dam on the important work he has done. The St. Gothard tunnel accident made it clear that common European legislation is very necessary and urgently required so that tough action can be taken against illegally employed drivers who do not carry the necessary paperwork. However, whether attestations will be sufficient will become evident from the evaluation. I should also like to congratulate Mr Grosch on his report. This too stresses the need for prescribing uniform requirements for drivers, because this is a typically transnational profession. In the final analysis, what matters is safety and fair competition on the roads and, in this light, it is of the utmost importance for each driver to have had adequate training before they use the public roads, and for them to be able to specialise and receive continuous training, and for the requirements to be equivalent in all Member States and accession countries. This will also afford the profession more standing, which is very important, and will also make it more appealing. For the Liberals, it is essential for what has been learnt also to be tested properly by an independent body. However, a certain degree of flexibility and pragmatism will be required. The duration of the training, as proposed by the Commission, is unnecessarily long and would have an inhibiting effect. Furthermore, a proper exam will provide far more certainty that the driver has actually learnt what he thinks he has learnt. However, the flexibility which Mr Bradbourn and others would like to build in is excessive in our view. We are unable to back the majority of the amendments because they would, in fact, render the regulation superfluous and the exam ineffective, and we should thus be overshooting our target."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples