Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I would first of all like to thank the rapporteur, Mr Sterckx, for his balanced and objective report, with the exception of Amendment No 11, which I will discuss presently, as he has managed to analyse the problems affecting maritime safety in Europe and propose a list of 113 operational measures. Mr President, Parliament has clearly demonstrated that it is a match for the circumstances and I also would like to extend my thanks to the Commission, not only because it has spared no efforts in collaborating in Parliament’s work, putting forward an exhaustive report that formed the basis of the rapporteur’s report, nor for the courage the Commissioner has shown, initiating 10 infringement proceedings, but above all because it has proposed a whole catalogue of measures to the Member States, measures which, if they had been adopted, would have prevented all of the problems we are facing today. In addition, Mr President, I would like to thank the Spanish authorities, who welcomed the members of the Commission and explained the scope of the Prestige tragedy to them in situ as well as the measures designed to resolve the situation. Rather than dwelling on the grievances of the past, it would be interesting if we tried to mobilise all our efforts to overcome these situations and ensure that they are not repeated. It is important that we try to establish the necessary resources and mobilise them to ensure that this does not happen and try to avoid drawing political advantage from these situations. In this respect, Mr President, I would like to mention the rapporteur’s Amendment No 11. He states that it is an amendment to set up a temporary committee but in reality, Mr President, as far as I am concerned it means, or implies, the constitution of a committee of inquiry. I believe that that would be a grave error for two reasons: firstly, because public opinion has already drawn its political conclusions and has expressed itself through its indisputable verdict at the ballot box, and secondly, Mr President, because a committee of inquiry is totally contrary to the substance and form of the Treaties and this House’s Rules of Procedure, which state that this is completely forbidden when a legal investigation is underway, because this is the appropriate means of determining who is actually responsible for this disaster. There is new, very interesting information as regards the seaworthiness of the vessel, the authorisation of the captain’s certificate, the statements made by the Brest maritime prefect at the hearing of the French National Assembly and the latest scientific simulation data, which was published yesterday and which states that in light of the adverse weather conditions it would have been almost impossible to provide shelter for the boat in a safe haven. Therefore, Mr Sterckx, I would ask you to utilise your proven capacity for finding a consensus and to make every effort to find a solution to the problem of the committee, which cannot be a committee of inquiry – although you call it a temporary committee – not only because it would go against the Treaty, Mr President, but because it would cancel out your excellent work and that of the Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism, robbing it of content and resulting in it not being worth the paper it is written on.

Political group: PPE-DE