Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-12-18-Speech-3-127"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021218.6.3-127"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I would begin by saying to Mr Piecyk that on this issue the Commission can hold its head high, because if what we proposed had been done we would not have had the
because it would have been out of use for several months before it sunk.
Also within the context of the IMO, the FIFG Funds, achieving the EUR 1 000 million we have proposed and if not, to promote the complementary European fund which is on the table in the Council of Ministers and which, of course, if in May there is no resolution within the IMO, will have to be approved quickly so that we may at least have that complementary fund.
Ladies and gentlemen, somebody spoke of the human factor: crews. Before the summer you will have proposals under the Greek Presidency which place great emphasis on promoting training and which furthermore – let us make this clear since there are many different opinions on this – clearly opts for a quality maritime sector.
I would also like to say that we must continue to make progress on international maritime law. We all know that it takes years, but we must do what is necessary so that it takes as little time as possible, and meanwhile we must talk to our neighbours. We must talk to Russia, we have the Baltic, which is an enclosed sea, where any accident, just as with the Mediterranean, would be much more tragic and would have much more dramatic consequences from an environmental point of view than in an open sea such as the Atlantic Ocean, which has greater capacity for regeneration.
Therefore we have to speak not only to Russia, but to all the countries of the Mediterranean and the Black Sea, that is, the Mediterranean in the broadest sense. Because we must manage to strengthen, guarantee and safeguard all our coasts and those of our neighbours and make progress in the international field.
The honourable Members say that there has been no progress at the Copenhagen European Council. Ladies and gentlemen, I would like to say that I have the conclusions of the Council of Nice and, in fact, they ask for the Erika I and Erika II packages to be implemented as soon as possible, even before the dates for their entry into force, and this has not been done. Copenhagen has said the same thing, and I hope that this time it will be done.
Ladies and gentlemen, it is too horrendous that after the
we are now talking about the
. I am sure that this time the States of the Union will really honour what they have said. And if not, we will say it and remind them of it here; and if not, I hope that all the honourable Members with connections and with national parties will raise the issue by means of your colleagues in national Parliaments as well.
Of course, the Commission, by means of the Agency and the reports we will present here, will specifically monitor true compliance by the Member States with the issues agreed. Amongst other things, the entry into force of the Erika I and Erika II packages, without waiting for 30 June 2003 or February 2004.
I would like to point out, ladies and gentlemen, that this includes, for example, ports of refuge, which have until February 2004. I do not believe we can wait until February 2004. We have to get to work now and in January we are going to begin talking to the Member States in order to confront this.
Let us make it very clear that a port of refuge is not just any port. A port of refuge must be a port with special facilities, easily accessible, so that a vessel with manoeuvring difficulties can access it during difficult storms. Because that is when accidents take place. They take place when the sea is rough, with winds of more than 100 kilometres per hour, in situations where ships have problems with manoeuvrability, with waves of 8 or 10 metres as in the case of the
or the
This means equipping these ports in a special way, providing them with access which is particularly easy and suitable. Providing them with material and human resources and action plans which allow them to deal with emergency situations. And that is what we have to deal with. Ladies and gentlemen, do not confuse a port of refuge with just any port, they are different things and this is a very complex issue.
I would like to continue with the issue of funds, which the honourable Members have mentioned. Ladies and gentlemen, in the case of the
I believe that European solidarity is clear. In the case of the
do you know how much support and contribution to funds Europe has provided? Well I will tell you: a reprogramming of EUR 10 million, of the Objective 2 funds, which Brittany benefited from.
Having said this, however, I would also like to say to the honourable Members and to everybody, let there be no mistake, that out there in waters off our coasts and other coasts of the world, there are currently more than 400
or
. There are such vessels with more than 20 000 tonnes of oil or more than 30 000 tonnes of oil-based products. There are 258 of a lesser tonnage, with 10 000, 20 000 and 30 000 tonnes approximately, which are also quantities which can cause enormous pollution. And what we have to do is respond so that, as soon as possible, these vessels are no longer off our coasts or, if possible, anywhere in the world. This is what we have to do and we must do it now. That is what we are talking about. And this is the first issue we have to confront here.
In the case of the
it is true that the disaster is even greater. But we are talking about a reprogramming of fisheries funds – FIFG Funds – of a supplement of other funds relating to fisheries which would be added to those FIFG Funds, we are talking about access to the Solidarity Fund to combat disasters which, it is true, is 2.5% of the amount for disasters, no more, but it is a European solidarity effort in any case. We are also talking about reprogramming the Cohesion Funds or Structural Funds allocated to Spain or to Galicia.
European solidarity is shown through funds and the Commission has been able to use them, as have the authorities, for example, of the Council, which has said yes clearly, and which has raised the possibility of adopting additional specific measures because, ladies and gentlemen, there are unfortunately still 50 000 tonnes of fuel oil on the sea bed.
50 000 tonnes of fuel oil in two wrecks which, unfortunately, are still leaking oil. The Commission is also participating in the Scientific Committee organised by the Spanish Government, which also includes French representatives and, if I am not mistaken, Portuguese representatives, and I hope that that scientific committee will tell us soon exactly how that fuel oil on the sea bed is developing. Because naturally what we cannot tolerate is that these two submerged sections of hull should continue giving out and expanding the oil slick. We must provide a solution. We will have to see what solutions are possible and we will also have to see how Europe can show solidarity, and I sure there will be no lack of it.
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, coastguards have been mentioned. I believe we must make progress on this, but I would also like to say that while we are able to create coastguards and other European bodies, which I am sure we will create in the future, what we need, at least, is to improve the coordination of all the maritime services in the States of the Union. I hope that, following this tragedy, all of this will be strengthened and that we will be able to make further progress and prevent any more tragedies such as the
or the
.
Secondly, the Erika
I and Erika II packages must be implemented straight away. And what does this mean? Implementing them in terms of the controls of the port authorities, and several Members have mentioned this, and it is true that there are two countries which do not even comply with the current legislation which is much more lax and less complicated to implement. It is urgent that they do so and they have committed themselves politically to it. The Agency, which will soon be operational – its board of management has already met, because we have brought forward its implementation and although it does not yet have its final headquarters it is beginning to function already – will have to ensure that in all ports of the Union – and it must be in all of them, since there cannot be ports of convenience in the European Union – appropriate controls are carried out in the appropriate way.
In the meantime, however, the Council must approve, by March, the regulations that the Commission will present by the end of the year on the accelerated withdrawal of single-hull vessels from European ports and the European prohibition of the use of single-hull vessels for the transport of heavy oil and bituminous products, tar and more polluting products.
We must make progress in the field of responsibilities and I hope that, in agreement with Commissioner Vitorino, we can quickly present this Parliament and the Council with a proposal for a criminal definition of serious negligence. And we must continue to make progress because, let us not beat about the bush, who is responsible here, who is responsible for the
? Firstly, we know very well, the shipowners, who have ships in bad condition. And those who charter ships at a low cost because it is cheaper and optimises certain profits and who do not care that there are risks, which are then suffered by coastal populations and society as a whole. This is what we have to prevent once and for all. And this means making progress in the field of responsibility and preventing this whole chain of companies involved from evading responsibility. But this means action on an international level as well as on a European Union level.
And this means, ladies and gentlemen, that the Commission must be a full member of the International Maritime Organisation in order to be able to promote its work. The fifteen States are already members and have acted in a coordinated fashion, but more is needed, the Commission must also be able to participate in this forum, in which it will be able to promote issues such as the responsibility of States with flags of convenience, that is, the system of obligatory audits which is being proposed within the context of the International Maritime Organisation.
And we must make progress on the issue of flags of convenience. Ladies and gentlemen, we must distinguish between two types of flag of convenience: fiscal and financial convenience and the convenience of those States which give their flags to wrecks, to ecological time-bombs, to ships which under no circumstances deserve to sail the seas. We must combat both types and I am also prepared to combat those which simply become tax havens."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"Prestiges"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples