Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-11-30-Speech-3-214"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20051130.19.3-214"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:spokenAs | |
lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, Mrs Kratsa, ladies and gentlemen, tomorrow Parliament will be voting on the contents of the White Paper. The Commission will be presenting its legislative proposal next Wednesday. Is it already ready? We can only hope that the echoes of our debates will reach the Commission nevertheless. It would be a pity if they did not, because the report we have before us, late as the hour sadly is, is of a high standard. I would like to thank Mrs Kratsa for the quality of her report and for her courtesy.
No one here disputes that healthy competition needs to be introduced into maritime transport, where most of the players are private operators. Do we need to go so far as total deregulation, however? That would be to overlook the changes that have taken place in the last few years and to deny the benefits of the present system. As a result of the Court of Justice’s and the Commission’s decisions, maritime conferences have in fact ceased to be cartels. They play a useful role, ensuring the stability and quality of the service and strengthening maritime safety through the regular renewal of fleets. They also guarantee the diversity of operators.
Having said that, the present system can still be improved. The exchange of information could be rationalised. There is also a need for clear rules for calculating excess loads. On the other hand, it seems to us dangerous to repeal Regulation 4056/86 without proposing even a provisional replacement. Simply abolishing the present system would accelerate concentration in the sector. Reducing the number of operators could have a negative effect on services to some ports and on prices. We understand review to mean ‘improvement’ not ‘repeal’. That is the message that Parliament should be sending to the European Commission and the Council with this report. We hope it will be heard."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples