Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-03-12-Speech-2-165"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020312.8.2-165"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I shall begin my short intervention by thanking the rapporteur for the work she has done.
Having said this, I will express my views on certain points of the report which, in my humble opinion, could have been dealt with differently, and on amendments and proposals which are difficult to accept, above all by professionals in the field of prevention; of course on the basis of the view that there is no such thing as zero risk and that work is an unpleasant activity.
I agree with the rapporteur that combating noise in the workplace is the best thing we can do, but I do not agree that collective protection measures should always have priority over individual protection measures. In any event, I believe that they are complementary or supplementary, or that individual measures should be applied rather than collective ones. We must consider the distribution of responsibilities; it clearly falls to the employer to provide the means, and it is they who have the disciplinary policy measures to ensure they are complied with, but the worker is no less responsible, and cannot ignore their responsibility, since they are the first to be affected if they do not adopt individual and personal protection measures.
I also disagree with you somewhat with regard to the scope, since I believe that, rather than talking about including the self-employed within the scope, it would be preferable to include them by means of the concept of workplaces and the person responsible for them, particularly in view of the increasingly frequent externalisation of many activities in numerous work sectors.
Amendment No 15 deals with an issue which is perhaps purely grammatical. Where it speaks of hearing protection measures ‘likely to be used’, I believe we should say ‘of mandatory use’. Furthermore, there are activities involving a different intensity of sound at different times, which must be considered and resolved. I liked what the rapporteur said about music.
All of this, Mr President, Mrs Thorning-Schmidt, must be done from the point of view of providing quality employment with less risk to the health and safety of workers, and this objective demands legislation which is clear in its principles and in its wording."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples