Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-04-24-Speech-2-260"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20070424.46.2-260"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, amongst other things, we are debating the fourth review of the Directive on ship inspection and survey organisations and the relevant activities of maritime administrations on behalf of flag States.
The previous review, which was the third, formed part of the first legislative package intended to put an end to the irresponsible conduct in maritime transport that has led to tragic accidents, such as the one involving the
which had such a serious impact on our environment and on our coasts.
In this new proposal, the European Commission is seriously considering whether the system of classification and inspection as a whole makes sufficient efforts to achieve the required levels of quality.
As rapporteur for the third review, I must respond by saying that sufficient efforts are not really being made. Not only is the maritime sector to blame, however, but also the fact that certain Member States – which are ultimately responsible – and some MEPs, did not want to do more.
I remember how the majority of the amendments that I proposed in my report, in a quest for more requirements and control in inspections, were rejected. At that time I expressed my disappointment and my conviction that that review would not improve things. Unfortunately I was right and we saw the tragic episode of the
accident, which once again called into question the most recent inspection to have been carried out on that ship and its insufficient compliance with the recommendations resulting from that inspection.
We are now once again amending the Directive on the organisations recognised for the carrying out of inspections of ships and, although I do not like the fact that those organisations can form part of the committee responsible for assessment, since that could affect their independence, I must acknowledge that the changes agreed in the Committee on Transport and Tourism substantially and positively improve it. For example, the prohibition of changing the class of ships without the aforementioned organisation passing the information on its inspections on to the new classification organisation, or the States’ monitoring of the recognised organisation and the control of the effectiveness of their inspection standards and rules by the European Commission, and also the mutual recognition of those rules amongst the different recognised organisations in accordance with stricter and more rigorous models.
I trust that all of these amendments will be approved by the plenary of the European Parliament, because they will mean that our seas and our environment face less risk and that will benefit all of us.
I regret that I cannot agree with everything Mr de Grandes Pascual – who is not currently in the Chamber – has said, but I do not share his opinion. I believe that the decision to move the
away from the Galician coast was prejudicial and that the consequences we suffered were worse than they would have been had it been taken to a port of refuge. I would nevertheless like to congratulate Mr de Grandes Pascual on his report, and all of the other Members who have spoken and who have been responsible for this third legislative package."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples