Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-04-19-Speech-1-161"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20100419.20.1-161"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, to say that the Union needs a real maritime transport development strategy is putting it mildly, since this is a major issue for the future of our Union in terms of food, economic and political independence, as well as environmental protection.
There is still much work to be done, but we will do it together because a sound, high-level maritime policy must also and, above all, respect those tenacious men and women who often risk their lives to satisfy the needs of others.
In order to be effective, this strategy must be comprehensive and cover shipbuilding, ship repair, ports, employment and worker training, as well as safety. The rejection of the directive on the liberalisation of port services by Parliament in 2006 represents, in my view, the cornerstone of any European maritime transport strategy.
Parliament is calling on the Commission to continue its fight against abuses of flags of convenience. This is positive, but the fight has yet to really begin. Ultimately, it is not abuses of flags of convenience that we need to combat, but the very existence of this practice. Otherwise, all of our good intentions on safety, on job creation, are doomed.
It is a positive step to make State aid for this sector conditional on having to meet quality social and environmental criteria, and on promoting jobs and training for seafarers from EU Member States, since the only true distortions of competition do not result from State aid, but instead from social, wage and environmental dumping.
The best guarantee for the safety of maritime transport lies in having well-paid, well-trained crews who enjoy good social protection and good working conditions.
I am pleased to see that we are finally talking about lifelong training for seafarers and strengthening professional qualifications and skills. We must now ensure that this is recognised as a right for all seafarers and have employers finance it.
I also support the requirements for shipbuilding and steel quality. Of course, the text submitted to us takes a certain number of steps forwards, but it also still contains many contradictions. It remains imprisoned in the shackles of the dogma of free and undistorted competition. It is still too shaped by pressure from the shippers’ lobby and by the worst ultraliberal utopian scenarios.
For example, how can it support employment for Europe’s seafarers but also call for studies to determine to what extent the new technologies could replace them?
How can it defend a reduction in dumping practices, while seeking freedom of movement for employees who do not even have identical rights within the Union? How can it highlight safety when it is self-declaration that prevails, and when some parties, attracted by the smell of profit, have no hesitation in transporting goods which could turn out to be particularly hazardous for people and the environment, without declaring them?"@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples