Mr President, I should like to thank Mr Friedrich who was the Vice-President in charge of the conciliation on road transport, and also Mr Rocard who took part as chairman of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs; in fact, all members of Parliament's delegation, because it was very much a team effort. Thanks are due to Commissioner Palacio and her staff for the crucial part they played at several points when it seemed we were at deadlock. Finally, I should like to thank the Belgian presidency for the energetic and determined way they pursued agreement on this dossier. The outcome of the conciliation on road transport is very much to be welcomed. It plugs one of the last remaining gaps in the working-time mosaic. It is profoundly important from the point of view of health and safety, and road safety more generally, and it is also important from the point of view of ensuring fair competition between the road, rail and other transport sectors. On specifics, first we have secured the inclusion of self-employed drivers as a matter of principle. Some will be disappointed that will not take full effect until four years beyond transposition. But we should not forget that the Council's common position would almost certainly have led to the permanent exclusion of the self-employed. The Council wanted to exclude them in principle and only consider including them on the basis of a Commission study looking at possible distortions at some point in the future. Even then the Council would have been determined to block such a move from the Commission. We now have a total reversal of that situation. The self-employed are included as a matter of principle and can only be excluded if two things happen: first, if the Commission proposes such an exclusion; and secondly, if we, as co-legislator here in Parliament, agree with such an exclusion. Neither of those things is very likely to happen. Another important point in the outcome is a strong definition of self-employment. Even with only a temporary exclusion of the self-employed, we felt it was very important that we won a clear and limiting definition of what a self-employed driver actually is, to avoid unscrupulous employers pushing drivers into false forms of independence. We now have a very clear definition in Article 3(e), and the final sentence of that article is a catch-all: drivers who are not caught by the checklist of criteria included in the definition will be dealt with as though they are employees under the directive. That is an extremely useful definition. We have also considerably improved and clarified the definition of working time. It also now applies to the self-employed except in respect of general administrative work, not linked directly to the specific transport operation under way. On night work, I again know that some will be disappointed that we did not succeed in limiting night work to eight hours. I will make three quick points regarding that. It would have been impossible to get that through Council. Most delegations were against. There are valid environmental and road safety reasons to transport goods – if they must be transported by road – at night. Concession on night work became a key in securing the inclusion of the self-employed. This is a joint debate involving consideration of the importance of work, information and consultation. Members will see from Article 8 concerning derogations on weekly working time and night work that we have insisted upon the promotion of social dialogue as the first option. My final point is that certain aspects of the text before us are highly relevant to the state of affairs being brought to light by the Kralowetz case. Those aspects seeking to block the creation of false independent status, dealing with record-keeping, and placing a focus on the duties of consigners and others responsible for determining routes and timetables, are particularly relevant. But Kralowetz makes two things glaringly obvious. First, in the enlargement process we desperately need additional social safeguard measures and a socially controlled opening of the labour market for workers from central and Eastern Europe, particularly in this sector. Secondly, it is glaringly clear that if the level of control exposed by this case continues, important texts like this one will be worth less than the paper they are printed on. We must insist on full and proper application of controls across the European Union. My final point is that it is absolutely essential that we have European-wide rules that are binding throughout the territories of the European Union, otherwise the Kralowetz case will be just one of many which we will see in the weeks and months to come.

Political group: PSE