Mr President, accidental marine pollution is in reality a rather odd expression. It is an expression which I do not think sounds alarming enough in relation to the problem we are confronted with here and which does not at all convey the seriousness of the matter. It includes oil spills, serious instances of which we are all aware of. We have all seen pictures of thousands of birds covered in oil. But it also includes all other possible examples of sea pollution which cause damage to health and to the environment and which often lead to extensive damage to, and real catastrophes for, the environment and animal life. Obviously, the responsibility lies with the Member States, but I also think I am right in saying that there are two reasons why cooperation at European level is required. Firstly, we are talking here about what is definitely a cross-frontier problem concerning pollution and the environment. And secondly, we derive a lot of benefit from being able to exchange experience and expertise with one another, so that we can make use of each other’s experience and support each other in taking measures to prevent and combat damage. That was recognised in the EU as long as 20 years ago with the first initiatives involving cooperation in this area, and the proposal we now have before us is in fact one which, in reality, extends and implements the cooperation established at that time. I should like to indicate four areas where I think it is a question of really useful innovations, especially when the proposed amendments put forward by the Committee on the Environment are included. The first is a matter which Mrs McKenna has been much exercised by, namely the question of providing a broad definition of both “accidental marine pollution” and “harmful materials”. It is not only oil spills we are talking about. It is just as important to make clear that we are also concerned here with leaks from dumped munitions. It may be a question of leaks from radioactive materials or of leaks which can cause people’s hormonal balance to be upset. I think it is important that we do not set limits here but that we define things broadly. Any measures taken ought to relate to all these materials. The other thing I want to refer to is the information system itself, which I think is very important. It is simply a key tool for efficient cooperation in this area so that we might quickly exchange information and so intervene early on. It also means that we are able to track down the polluters and so both assign liability and establish the relevant penalty to the extent that that is necessary. The third thing I want to mention is the reference in the comments to the Directive concerning harbour facilities for receiving waste from ships. I think it is very important that we also call upon these particular facilities in our efforts to prevent damage to the marine environment. It is important that ships should easily be able to dispose of their waste. The final matter I want to refer to is the question of involving neighbouring non-EU countries in Eastern and Central Europe and in the Mediterranean and Baltic areas. If cooperation is to be effective, then it is enormously important that we involve these countries. In this connection, I also think it is important that reference should be made in the proposed amendments to the fact that we ought to be giving economic support to these countries so that they have a real opportunity to participate in the process. After emphasising these four points, however, I would say that we are very glad to support the proposal, together with the amendments proposed by the Committee on the Environment.

Political group: PSE