Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-02-02-Speech-4-030"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2006-02-02"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Social legislation relating to road transport Harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road transport2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20060202.4.4-030"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2006-02-02-Speech-4-0312
lpv:speaker	lp:Jeanine Hennis-plasschaert2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation to the EU-Romania Joint Parliamentary Committee (2004-09-15--2006-12-31)3 substitute; Temporary Committee on the alleged use of European countries by the CIA for the transport and illegal detention of prisoners (2006-01-19--2007-02-14)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Turkey Joint Parliamentary Committee (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 member; TRAN (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 substitute; LIBE (2004-07-22--2007-01-14)3 member; ALDE (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 unknown; Volkspartij voor Vrijheid en Democratie (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, we have come a long way. Mrs Jensen has said what needed to be said. The aim was to update, clarify, and, above all, simplify, the existing rules in the area of driving times and resting times, with a view to establishing fair competition among road hauliers, traffic safety and guaranteeing the social interests of the people who work in the road transport sector. Previous documents appeared to overshoot this target completely. Not enough consideration was given to the fact that what really mattered was not so much the rules on driving times and resting times as their enforcement and the different ways in which they were interpreted. All credit to the rapporteur, Mr Markov. His commitment and involvement were phenomenal and I should like to thank him for that. Something which you will not hear me say often, but the fact that the agreement on which we are voting today can be seen as reasonably acceptable, even by Liberal standards, is mainly thanks to the Council’s persistence during the negotiations, and so I strongly disagree with what Mr Piecyk had to say. In fact, the purpose and necessity of a number of provisions in the present agreement can still be called into question. For example, the splitting up of the daily rest period into three hours and then nine strikes me as extremely restrictive. Similarly, the weekend rest rule of 45 hours every two weeks certainly does not contribute to the flexibility that is so desperately needed in road transport. It completely escapes me how such rigid provisions could in any way contribute to road safety or better working conditions. The present agreement may, then be far from perfect, but, as I said earlier, it is acceptable. At least the industry now knows where it stands. Thank God, the daily rest period remained restricted to 11 hours. The direct link with working times inspection has been removed. The shorter weekly resting times can now simply be taken in the vehicle. Very importantly, there is now finally clarity about when the digital tachograph is to be introduced. In a nutshell, the proposal is not perfect, but acceptable, and I will be giving it the thumbs up."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph