Mr President, it all started in November 2001 when the Prestige sank and tens of thousands of tonnes of oil ended up in the sea off the Galician, Spanish and French coasts, with residues of it staining even the British and Belgian coasts. It was a true European tragedy and once again, a tragedy that we needed like a hole in the head. The European Parliament appointed Dirk Sterckx as rapporteur, but due to circumstances in his own country, he has asked me to replace him. I shall therefore replace him on behalf of the Liberals and say a few words. Parliament is deeply disappointed, because after the disaster involving the Erika, we had already worked with the Commission constructively in order to tighten up policy. The upshot was two Erika packages, but another disaster had to happen first. In September 2003, Parliament approved an initial report by Mr Sterckx, which gave a detailed account of events and made a few recommendations. Its salient points were: first of all, tightening up the regime of ports of refuge and the request to organise a compensation system and secondly, the setting up of a temporary committee. The Temporary Committee on improving safety at sea (MARE) was set up in November 2003 and its brief was firstly, to look into recent shipping disasters, particularly the Prestige and the Erika; secondly, to analyse the social and economic implications; thirdly, to evaluate existing European and international rules; fourthly, to examine how the recommendations from the first resolution have been acted upon and finally, to formulate additional proposals, if necessary. After six months of hard work, we now have a balanced report. It was not always easy to take a rational view of the situation, but fortunately, everyone pulled together and has adopted a constructive stance so far. As such, approval of this report will hopefully constitute an important step in the direction of a safer sea, because that was the key motivation behind the work of these past six months. Maritime safety is in everyone's interests, because another Prestige or Erika sinking off any coast does not bear thinking about. On behalf of Mr Sterckx, I should in any case like to thank Mr Jarzembowski, chairman of the MARE Committee, the people who we interviewed, including the master of the Prestige, who received a delegation of the committee, all coordinators and all fellow MEPs. Mr Sterckx deeply regrets that local issues prevent him from being here today. Let me now turn to the report. Firstly, the clearing of the wreck. According to the Spanish authorities, 43 000 tonnes of crude oil have been recovered. Repsol, the company that will be removing the remaining oil from the wreck, states that the wreck holds another 14 000 tonnes. As indicated in the report, there are therefore still 20 000 tonnes unaccounted for that still constitute a threat. The cleared oil is being stored somewhere but is yet to be processed. Secondly, the meeting with the master has exposed the contrasting statements, on the one hand, by the Spanish authorities who claimed that right at the outset 10 000 tonnes of oil ended up in the sea, and, on the other, by the master that on the first day, only 2 000 to 3 000 tonnes were lost via one of both openings. Moreover, the master's treatment does not exactly inspire people to work in shipping. It is quite a responsibility and it is very tough when you are personally put under pressure in this manner. This also applies to a huge number of colleagues of his. In this respect, the Prestige is not alone, unfortunately; witness what has happened to other crew members in shipping disasters. We are still awaiting a report on the Prestige by the flag state, the Bahamas. That is unfortunate and actually very unsportsmanlike when you consider the efforts we have all made to contribute to the activities. I should like to comment on another few proposals. First of all, compliance with existing law remains a priority. We must first and foremost apply what already exists. We are delighted to be able to conclude that the Member States have caught up with regard to the directive on port state control and the classification bureaus. That is why we would suggest updating the text of paragraph 7 and rejecting the second part, because evidently, that issue has been resolved. A sound compromise has been reached in the committee on the European coastguard service. I have noticed that the final section of the compromise creates confusion and is at odds with our request for an independent decision-making and command structure at Member State level capable of enforcing the necessary decisions. The visit by the Englishman, Robert Middleton, to our committee was very instructive. I would therefore suggest removing the contradiction in Amendment No 26 and bringing paragraph 13 into line with paragraph 10. I would like to finish off by saying something about labelling and tracing of loading units containing dangerous goods. This aspect has been included in the report, but I think that a quick scan from the Commission is required to indicate the level of transmitters we would need to deploy. We would probably need passive, but possibly also active, transmitters for heavy cargo. I would like to ask Mrs Palacio to look into this matter again. There are very simple, cheap transmitters, which can be attached to any cargo. These could be introduced tomorrow; the market is ready for them. I think, though, that it is important to look into these matters at greater length. I am looking forward to your response.

Political group: ELDR