Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-01-16-Speech-3-243"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020116.16.3-243"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, these proposals for the training of heavy goods vehicle drivers are, like much of the legislation adopted by this House, totally unnecessary. All we need is the mutual recognition of national qualifications, possibly underpinned by a loose framework directive, to ensure minimum standards, especially with regard to third-country nationals. However, what we have is a typical piece of EU legislation: intrusive, prescriptive, vastly expensive. It is a Christmas tree on which we have hung our wish list of expensive baubles. Environmental issues are important, but they have no bearing on the ability to drive a truck.
The proposals for training on a healthy diet have already attracted widespread ridicule in the British press. Asking the British trucker to give up his sausage and eggs is like inviting the Pope to a disco – it simply makes us look absurd. But we are inviting worse than ridicule. In the UK alone these proposals are estimated by the industry to cost over EUR 200m a year in a business already under great stress. The time commitment for training required of the individual owner-operator is unsustainable and will drive hundreds out of business.
In this House we constantly pay lip service to the needs of SMEs, yet again and again we ignore their concerns. We talk about the problem of unemployment, then we pass directives that destroy jobs. These proposals form part of a concerted attack by the Commission on the road haulage industry.
I should declare an interest: my stepson is a truck driver and he and his colleagues are aghast at these proposals. I have studied them in vain for a realistic business impact assessment. We are looking at huge costs, huge damage to the industry – especially to small businesses – and huge damage to European competitiveness. A further impediment to the achievement of the Lisbon objectives, and all for what? For benefits which at best are vague and speculative. I urge colleagues to reject the Grosch report. Let us stand back for a moment and consider the huge damage we do as we create a torrent of onerous and unnecessary legislation."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples