Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-07-01-Speech-1-033"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020701.4.1-033"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I should like to take the place of the rapporteur in this matter. As we all know how difficult it is to reach Strasbourg, we understand all too well when our French fellow MEPs have difficulties with this too.
The free movement of goods is one of the European Union’s four basic freedoms. In principle, driving bans, in whatever form, constitute an infringement of this freedom. In both the EU’s core countries, France and Germany, HGV traffic at weekends on through roads is a very sensitive issue for the local people, whose objections we take very seriously.
On the other hand, it has to be recognised that HGV traffic ensures that, in our complex society, products and foodstuffs arrive on time. Whilst taking the sensitivities into consideration, we need to try to find a viable solution for all parties concerned subject to these pre-conditions. Along with the European Commission, we believe that we have found this solution in the report by Mr Savary who deserves all credit for this. Nobody needs to cut down the current weekend driving bans by even one minute.
Mr Ferber – it would be nice if Mr Ferber, too, were paying attention – nobody needs to cut down the current weekend driving bans by even one minute. We only want to make the bans predictable, thus allowing transport and logistics experts to schedule their journeys in good time and to consult clients about possible different rates of delivery.
At the moment, the increasing number of uncoordinated new driving bans is a nightmare for the sector. We are trying to solve this by imposing notification duty in respect of new driving bans to the European Commission under the said conditions. This is therefore not about harmonising driving times. We only want to guard each other from surprises. National bank holidays will not be harmonised either. All bank holidays that are already subject to a driving ban can simply remain intact.
Consequently, the Commission proposal to reach a kind of minimum regulation of harmonised conditions for new driving restrictions deserves our support. It is hoped that this revised proposal will also appeal to opponents of European interference in respect of driving bans. After all, the regulation only applies to the TEN roads. For all other roads, the Member States can determine themselves whether they wish to introduce driving bans. Most amendments that have been tabled by the Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism form a constructive addition to the Commission proposal. A European information system, for example, is of major importance to the European transport sector.
In addition, Parliament has tabled amendments that should guarantee good parking and sanitary facilities for drivers who are unable to return home for an entire weekend and are forced to spend that time at a lorry park. The social conditions which drivers face as a result of driving bans can rightly be termed tragic.
A whole raft of amendments has been tabled to expand the list of derogations. My group will be rejecting all expansions. I personally have to say that I will be voting in favour of Amendment No 21, which pertains to the transport of flowers, although my group will, unfortunately, be voting against it. This will, in fact, hardly affect the driving ban.
Finally, I should like to point out that Amendments Nos 4 and 13 jeopardise the directive, to say the least. Thanks to these amendments, Member States can determine at their own discretion whether or not they wish to impose driving bans, rather than via comitology within the European Commission, as has hitherto been the case. These amendments, therefore, undermine the entire proposal. This is why I should like to urge this House to vote against these amendments, as well as against Amendment No 12. In addition, the amendment by Mr Ferber and others will be adopted by my group this time round. We voted in favour of it in the committee."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples