Mr President, Madam Vice-President, I really cannot endorse most of the previous speaker’s comments, especially her concerns about the Agency’s competences. You know, if we look back at the past – the Erika, the Prestige – the Member States really have shown that they are incapable of resolving the problems promptly on their own. We need the European Maritime Safety Agency, and we also need an expansion of its competences. This House has always thrown its weight behind the Agency. Let me recall just one particular instance: in autumn, when the Council was about to cut the posts for the Agency, which was being set up at that time, we promptly reversed this measure at the first reading of the budget. Madam Vice-President, I too believe that the rapporteur’s proposals – namely to provide the Agency with the requisite, which means genuinely adequate, financial resources to charter ships, equipment, and so on, and deliver a specialised pollution response service swiftly in the event that this is requested by a coastal state – mean that the Agency must indeed be provided with sufficient resources. Of course, I am slightly sceptical as well. We should not be overloading the Agency with general threat prevention tasks. The European Maritime Safety Agency’s primary objective is to ensure a high, uniform and effective level of maritime safety and prevention of pollution by ships within the Community, not to undertake general prevention of terrorism. We must be very careful to ensure that we do not raise expectations which the Agency cannot fulfil. Madam Vice-President, now that we have embarked on new territory – or waters – by establishing the Agency, we have called for it to draw up a detailed work programme swiftly. This is because we want to discuss the work programme with you, Madam Vice-President, since responsibility for the Agency lies with you as the Commissioner. The Agency does not have a separate structure or identity; instead, the Commission is responsible for ensuring that it operates efficiently. I have no doubt that you will do the right thing, Madam Vice-President, but we must discuss the matter in detail, for we cannot overload the Agency with tasks and then fail to provide it with the requisite personnel and resources. This would create difficulties for the Agency. We therefore need to discuss precisely which tasks it must perform, which tasks it can perform, and which resources we will need for this process. I wish to endorse the comments of one of the previous speakers. Madam Vice-President, I would be pleased if you could tell us this evening how quickly the Agency will be able to relocate. We were always gratified that the Agency started work in Brussels because the work was urgent and necessary. However, given that the Heads of State or Government have already tinkered around for a long time and trawled around various locations in Europe, and have now decided in favour of Lisbon, we do not want the next two years to be taken up with renting space and getting the premises ready before the real work can begin. Perhaps you can give us some indication of a possible timetable, because we want the move to Lisbon to take place swiftly so that an effective Agency is up and running very soon. I would like to make one final comment. In my previous life, I was a judge, and I think we must be cautious in what we say about the captain of the Prestige. I too have the impression that he should have the opportunity to leave Spain in order to live elsewhere in the internal market, namely in his home country, Greece. However, in a democracy, in a state under the rule of law, there is a separation of powers, and it is not the Spanish authorities but the Spanish court which is preventing him from leaving the country. We in this House should be very careful and should not interfere with judicial independence.

Political group: PPE-DE