Datasets:

danieleV9H

/

en_corpora_parliament_processed

like 0

we have agreed to this

after all we do not wish to quarrel with the commission if at all possible we believe that the commission and parliament need to tread the same path

however we in parliament also have a supervisory role with regard to the commission and we do not have to agree with everything which comes out of the commission

i should like us to be able to do a reasonable amount of preparation for the debate on the fiveyear programme in our groups

you cannot prepare if you hear a statement in this house and have no idea of its content

that is why we would recommend and it is my impression that the commission is also open to this idea that we hold the debate on the commission's longterm programme up to the year 2005 in february and i hope that the commission will agree on a programme before then which it will propose to us and that at the same time in february we also hold the debate on the commission's legislative programme for the year 2000

the fact that the subjects are connected also suggests that we should hold the debate on both programmes together

that is why my group firmly rejects the proposal made by the socialist group

(applause from the ppede group)

madam president i would like to make it very clear that above all the commission has absolute respect for the decisions of this parliament and amongst those the decision establishing its agenda

we therefore respect whatever parliament may decide

but i would also like to make it very clear that president prodi made a commitment to this parliament to introduce a new debate as mr barón crespo has reminded us which would be in addition to the annual debate on the commission' s legislative programme on the broad areas of action for the next five years that is to say for this legislature

madam president i would like to say that the agreement reached in september distinguished this debate from the annual presentation of the commission' s legislative programme

i would also like to say that the commission is prepared and ready to hold this debate whenever it is convenient and that we were ready to do so this week as we had agreed originally on the basis that it would be presented the day before in a speech to parliamentary groups

therefore madam president i would like to repeat that the commission has debated the action plan for the next five years and when parliament decides this week if that is the decision we are prepared to come and explain the programme for the next five years and next month the programme for 2000 which is what we fully agreed upon

i propose that we vote on the request of the group of the party of european socialists that the commission statement on its strategic objectives should be reinstated

(parliament rejected the request) president

still on the subject of wednesday' s sitting i have another proposal regarding the oral question on capital tax

the ppede group is requesting that this item be taken off the agenda

is there a member who wishes to speak on behalf of this group to propose this

madam president i can hear a ripple of laughter from the socialists i was told that large sections of the socialist group were also keen to have this item taken off the agenda because at the vote in the conference of presidents no vote was received from the working group of members of the socialist group responsible for this matter

i do not know whether this information is correct but the ppede group would in any case be grateful if this item were removed because parliament has addressed this issue several times already

decisions have also been adopted against a tax of this kind

that is why my group moves that this item be taken off the agenda

thank you mr poettering

we shall now hear mr wurtz speaking against this request

madam president i would firstly like to point out mr poettering' s lack of logic

he has just been preaching to the group of the party of european socialists because they went back on a decision taken in a perfectly clear manner at the conference of presidents and now he is doing just the same

we discussed that matter and we were unanimous with the exception of the ppe and eldr groups as my fellow chairmen will recall i even mentioned that it was not a matter of knowing whether one was for or against the tobin tax but of whether one dared to hear what the commission and the council thought of it

it is not a lot to ask

i therefore repeat the proposal that this oral question to the commission and the council should be retained so that we can find out once and for all the positions of these two bodies regarding the proposal which is relatively modest but which would give a clear message to public opinion particularly after the tide of feeling generated by the failure of the seattle conference

we shall proceed to vote on the ppede group' s request that the oral question regarding the capital tax be withdrawn from the agenda

(parliament rejected the request with 164 votes for 166 votes against and 7 abstentions)

madam president i would like to thank mr poettering for advertising this debate

thank you very much

madam president has my vote been counted i was unable to vote electronically since i do not have a card

my vote was in favour

indeed if we add the two members who have declared themselves then the result of the vote would be

madam president the presidency has already declared the result of the vote

there is no room for amendments

madam president in the earlier vote and i will abide by your ruling on this matter on the question of the strategic plan of the commission i indicated that i would like to speak in advance of the vote on behalf of my group

that did not happen

i would appreciate it if on the close of this item of business i might be allowed to give an explanation of vote on behalf of my group

this is an important matter it would be useful for the record of the house to state how people perceive what we have just done in the light of their own political analysis

madam president i do not wish to reopen the debate but i had also asked for the floor to comment on mr barón crespo's motion

you did not call me either

i regret this but the vote has already been taken and the decision is made so let us leave the matter there

i am terribly sorry mr hänsch and mr cox i did not see you asking to speak

even so i think the positions are quite clear and they shall be entered in the minutes

when we adopt the minutes for today' s sitting tomorrow then any members who think the positions have not been explained clearly enough may ask for amendments

this seems to me to be a workable solution

of course the minutes for tomorrow' s sitting will take into account any additional explanations

i think this is a better solution than proceeding now to extremely timeconsuming explanations of votes

mr cox mr hänsch would this be acceptable to you

madam president if the vote records correctly how my group voted i shall not and cannot object to that

if your ruling is that i cannot give an explanation of vote i accept that but with reservations

we shall pay particular attention to the wording of the minutes as we always do of course

if they do not properly reflect the positions adopted then we may correct them if necessary

(the order of business was adopted thus amended)

safety advisers for the transport of dangerous goods

the next item is the report (a50105/1999) by mr koch on behalf of the committee on regional policy transport and tourism on the common position adopted by the council with a view to adopting a european parliament and council directive on the harmonisation of examination requirements for safety advisers for the transport of dangerous goods by road rail or inland waterways (c50208/1999 1998/0106(cod))

commissioner madam president ladies and gentlemen i can be quite frank in saying that i welcome the council's common position on harmonising the training of safety advisers for the transport of dangerous goods by road rail or inland waterway

firstly we needed to take action on a formal level in order to meet the requirements of directive 96/35/ec which obliges the member states to appoint safety advisers and to organise the training instruction and examination of these people but does not explain this explicitly

secondly by adopting this directive we achieve a) an increase in safety when dangerous goods are both transported and transhipped b) a reduction in distortions of competition resulting from wide variations in national training structures and training costs and c) equal opportunities for safety advisers on the european labour market

thirdly this directive as it currently stands in the common position guarantees in particular because it confines itself exclusively to minimum standards a high degree of flexibility and modest regulation by the european union by adopting it we contribute to the member states' bearing a high level of individual responsibility

all of this is in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity and is therefore to be greatly welcomed

our amendments from the first reading have i believe been taken into account very satisfactorily

they have either been accepted or transposed with no change in the substance or they have been rejected because the corresponding european arrangements have not been included for example a system of penalties for violations of the rules or a complex classification structure for related groups of questions

the one unanimously adopted amendment of the committee on regional policy and transport which concerns the timetable for implementing the directive is something which i would urge you to support

by not setting a specific date for the member states to implement the directive and instead giving them a period of three months after its entry into force we are introducing a flexibility clause which ensures that the directive will be implemented without delay

i would urge you to endorse this

madam president we cannot and must not accept the fact that we hear ever more frequently of accidents causing major damage on our roads but also on our railways and waterways not solely but at least partly because those involved do not take the transport of dangerous goods seriously enough or because as a result of ignorance or a lack of training on the part of the drivers or others responsible for the various vehicles a minor accident has all too often become a major disaster

as an austrian i still have a vivid memory as i believe we all do of the catastrophe which cost so many human lives last year in the tauern tunnel where subsequent work to rebuild the parts of the tunnel which had been destroyed in this fire continued for many months at huge expense

the renovation project which lasted for months cut off this important route between the north and south of europe

the traffic which had to be diverted because of this stretched the patience of many thousands of people in the eu to the limit

in fact all hell broke loose in some municipalities in my province

prevention has to be our answer to disasters of this kind and this draft directive is an important step towards welltrained safety advisers being available so that the right action is taken in good time

all the same we must not content ourselves with enacting european law to ensure greater safety

we also need to follow this up and make sure that our rules are transposed by the member states in good time and even more importantly we need to ensure that they are also applied afterwards

please let this not be yet another sector where we subsequently have to lament the lack of enforcement

i should like to address one final point we must not content ourselves with sealing another hole in the safety net and shutting our eyes to the fact that where transport safety in europe is concerned there is still much more to be done

in this context i should like to make a request and ask the commissioner responsible who is with us here today to table an appropriate text as soon as possible with a view to continuing to make it safer for traffic to transit tunnels in the future so that we in europe do not have to experience any more such disasters on this scale

madam president first of all i should like to thank mr koch for his report which has at its heart the issue of transport safety

the report looks at the issue of harmonising the examination requirements for safety advisors working in the areas of transportation of dangerous goods by road rail and inland waterway

i congratulate him on his excellent report

transport safety has sadly been in the news recently the paddington rail crash in london the terrible rail crash in norway the two aviation crashes involving eu citizens and the natural disaster involving the erika off brittany all within the last four months remind us that transport safety can never be taken for granted and that those charged with protecting the public must be highly motivated and highly qualified

the rapporteur has pointed out to the house that in its common position the council has accepted six of parliament's ten amendments put forward at first reading and that the substance of parliament's other amendments has been retained

my group will therefore support the common position and looks forward to the enactment of the legislation which will provide us with yet another tool in our fight to make transport in the european union as safe as possible

when it comes to safety my group will always support any initiatives to improve transport safety

we still have a lot of work to do in this area as recent events have proved

madam president i would like to make a few comments

i would like first of all to thank the rapporteur for his exceptionally accurate and technical work on the report and secondly the commission for the proposal it has submitted

we are concerned here with the harmonisation of examination requirements but also in fact with minimum requirements

this is a pity in a sense

needless to say safety on roads railways and inland waterways is of key importance and given the international nature of these types of transport training for safety advisors should also be harmonised therefore as well as the requirements of the new adr for example which is under way

this is important but so is enforcement and there are of course a number of reasons why we need to pay particular attention to this

just think of the road accidents which have occurred over recent years for example in belgium the netherlands and a number of other countries where lorries carrying dangerous goods continued to drive in foggy conditions when really they should have pulled off the road instead

or ships from eastern europe which moor adjacent to ships over here with all the obvious risks that this entails

furthermore it has transpired that research in the ports in belgium finland but also in japan has shown that 50 of containers with partially dangerous cargo are not delivered correctly for shipment

in short the issue is an important one