Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-07-04-Speech-2-365"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060704.34.2-365"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, we are now on the point of reaching an agreement at second reading with the Council on a very sensitive proposal.
The second improvement concerns the scientific and medical assessment of the provisions relating to flight and duty time limitations and to cabin crews. This assessment will be carried out by the European Aviation Safety Agency. I can confirm that I have already asked the European Aviation Safety Agency to include this assessment in its 2007 work programme, with a view to preparing some draft measures for submission to the Commission. On that basis, the analysis period can actually be reduced to two years, Mr Stockmann, as Parliament is proposing.
The Commission will issue a statement to shed more light on the nature of these studies, particularly in relation to the conduct and training of cabin crew in emergency situations.
Finally, my third point is that the Commission proposal is designed to lay down minimum harmonised safety standards, at a high level and applicable throughout the Community. Nevertheless, in a number of Member States, more binding national measures may be in force. The Commission agrees that no aspect of this regulation should lead to a reduction in the highest safety standards, where these already exist.
Mr President, I shall conclude. The Commission therefore has no difficulty in accepting the amendments that reflect these three principles and therefore supports the compromise amendments, that is to say Amendments 19 to 25. On the other hand, the Commission does not support Amendments 11, 16 and 17 because they overlap and because they are, in fact, covered by the compromise amendments. The same is true of Amendments 12 to 15 and Amendment 18. They concern technical amendments to various parts of the annex which are, in fact, going to be regulated by the comitology procedure provided for in this regulation.
Well, Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I believe that this piece of work, which is welcomed by the representatives of aviation staff, bears the hallmark of parliamentary work. I am grateful to the rapporteur and the Members of Parliament for this.
We owe this result above all to the excellent work of your rapporteur, Mr Stockmann, and I should like to congratulate him in particular.
Allow me to point out the approach underpinning the proposal for a regulation. It is primarily a question of maintaining a high level of safety, while ensuring that there is fair competition among airlines.
The amended proposal of 2004 introduced provisions concerning, on the one hand, flight times and rest periods for crews, which are currently referred to as ‘flight and duty time limitation'. It thus complies with the request of the European Parliament, which is concerned about the national disparities in this area. For a long time now, professional pilots’ associations and several airlines have been severely criticising these disparities, which are detrimental to safety and to the normal forces of competition.
Indeed, many investigations conducted in the wake of accidents have identified crew fatigue as one of the factors contributing to these accidents. The regulations on flight times are sometimes too flexible and allow airlines to have their staff on duty for too long, to the detriment of safety and of companies subject to stricter legislation.
The amended proposal of 2004 entails, on the other hand, cabin crew being certified on the basis of minimum requirements, as happens in the United States and as the employees concerned, together with part of the industry, were demanding. These minimum requirements should make it possible to improve air safety by increasing the quality standard with which staff must comply. They should also bring the conditions of competition for airlines in line with each other and make it easier for staff to move around within a fully liberalised air transport market.
It is true that the Council has had great difficulty in reaching an agreement, as a result of the Member States' very different points of view. However, the Council finally succeeded in reaching a compromise on a common position at the end of February 2006. The Council observes in its common position that the amendment tabled by Parliament has been fully taken on board, one or two slight alterations apart. The Commission does, of course, accept this position on the part of the Council, which is willing to adopt the main elements of Parliament’s proposal. On certain points, relating in particular to the flight and duty time limitations of cabin crew, we simply need to carry out a scientific and medical assessment before reaching a decision on the matter. This analysis would be entrusted to the European Aviation Safety Agency.
Since the Council adopted its common position, our three institutions have been working intensively to reach an agreement at second reading. The common position has been clarified and improved thanks to the amendments tabled by the European Parliament, and I am particularly grateful to Mr Stockmann for this text.
The first improvement concerns airlines whose business is based exclusively on night-time operations. The Commission, in agreement with Parliament, feels it necessary to assess the consequences in terms of safety and fatigue of the provisions concerning flight and duty time limitations and rest periods. On the basis of this assessment, the Commission will table those amendments needed to take account of these specific operating models."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples