Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2016-03-07-Speech-1-143-000"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20160307.14.1-143-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spoken text
"Mr President, there over 300 ports in our European network, even leaving aside the very small ones, and more than three million jobs depend on the port sector directly or indirectly. Especially given the diversity in size, operations and governance of EU ports, we should only regulate this sector with the utmost care. Now, I should say that I am not saying this on behalf of the S&D, but I and other Labour MEPs are not opposed to the idea of progressive balanced EU measures on ports. These could help improve standards in the sector, in the UK and across the whole of Europe, on port safety and security, terms and conditions of workers, environmental protection, as well as provide a secure framework for investment. The problem is that, despite the commendable efforts of our rapporteur, this proposal, even if amended as he suggests, simply does not quite achieve the goals that I have mentioned. There are good provisions on training. There are good provisions encouraging good practice on minimum requirements on tendering, but it is not enough overall. The draft regulation is in fact an example of the spectacular double standards of the so-called better regulation agenda; for instance, the provisions to regulate port charges will undoubtedly still be an administrative burden for ports and do not give legal clarity if you read them carefully – you are still asking yourself questions about what they mean. They are also unsupported by concrete evidence from the Commission of major problems in charging practices in many ports and the report by PwC – the management consultancy report that looked into this – did not uncover major problems. There has also been no updated impact assessment since at least 2012 despite the new institutional agreement on better regulation saying that these things should be updated. Equally the right for trade unions to take legitimate industrial action is not sufficiently protected in Article 8 and Article 10 fails to provide for the compulsory transfer of staff. We were looking for something that improved workers’ rights, including in relation to how agency workers are dealt with, but it is just not there. Ports will not specifically also be required to consult environmental experts and local communities. So in overall terms, please reject the Commission’s proposal."@en1
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata
lpv:videoURI

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph