However, when it comes to safety, I am rather sceptical because safety in Sweden, for example, is in principle no different from safety in Germany, Italy or Austria.
We do not want to make the conditions of competition worse for some countries unilaterally and improve them for countries such as Austria or other transit countries.
Mr President, I would firstly like to congratulate the rapporteur, Mr Koch, on his magnificent work and his positive cooperation with the Commission with regard to improving the texts and presenting this report and this proposal;
in the end there is only one amendment on the requirements for the aptitude examination for safety advisers in the transport of dangerous goods by road, rail or inland waterway.
We understand that it is important that the two institutions - Parliament and Commission - cooperate and work together and that the current cooperation with the Committee on Regional Policy, and in particular the transport group, is magnificent.
The common position includes practically all of the amendments accepted by the Commission and harmonises the minimum examination requirements for safety advisers and, at second reading, we can accept the amendment on the proposed date, which is much more realistic than the one originally suggested by the Commission, bearing in mind that we have now spent several years debating this question.
Very briefly, I would like to thank the various Members for their interventions and to tell you that safety is one of the Commission's priorities in the field of transport.
In this regard, I would also like to refer very briefly to the problems of the tunnels, which Messrs Rack and Swoboda have referred to, which, in the case of Austria, is doubtless a very sensitive issue, and great effort should be made to improve their safety.
This week we will be holding a debate here on the safety of sea transport, in light of the Erika disaster, and in the course of this year we will have to discuss our objectives in terms of the safety of air transport.
As I will say in the debate on the Erika disaster, we do not wait until there is a disaster to deal with the question of safety, but we work on it even when there are no such circumstances, which simply serve to demonstrate the urgency for an effective response to this type of problem.
The next item is the report (A5-0104/1999) by Mr Koch, on behalf of the Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism, on the proposal for a European Parliament and Council Directive amending Directive 94/55/EC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States with regard to the transport of dangerous goods by road [COM (1999) 158-C5-0004/1999-1999/0083 (COD)].
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the Directive on the approximation of the laws of the member states with regard to the transport of dangerous goods by road, which entered into force on 1 January 1997, contains a number of transitional provisions which are only valid for a limited period of time, the term of validity being linked to the completion of specific standardisation work by the CEN, that is the European committee for standardisation.
Should the European Union fail to take action, then Member States would be obliged to amend their national legislation for a very brief period, until the CEN completes its work, which would cause unnecessary cost and uncertainty.
The amendment to the Directive on today's agenda does not therefore affect the existing harmonisation of the transport of dangerous goods in the community.
It merely prolongs transitional rules by postponing deadlines, deletes provisions which are no longer applicable, and lays down the procedures for a) carrying out the ad hoc transportation of dangerous goods and b) enacting less stringent national regulations, in particular for the transport of very small amounts of dangerous goods within strictly defined local areas.
We would like to ensure that there is a reference to this as early as the recitals and that the period within which the Council has to make a decision - which is not clearly worded - is set at a maximum of three months.
A final amendment is intended to ensure that tanks and tankers put into service between 1 January 1997 and the entry into force of this Directive may continue to be used provided that they have been constructed and maintained in accordance with it.
It is good that this Directive should be established now, as, otherwise, member states would have to amend their national acts for a very short time, a period of transition, which would again mean unnecessary costs and which would once more increase concern with regard to EU bureaucracy.
Mr President, with your permission I should like to begin by expressing my admiration for the way in which you executed the quick changeover of the chairmanship just now during the debate.
On the subject at hand, I think that the people of Europe must be able to be confident that the goods - however dangerous they are - which are transported on Europe's roads, railways, and so on are as safe as possible.
The rapporteur, Mr Koch, to whom we express our thanks for the work which he has done on this, has already pointed out that basically everything could have been somewhat more advanced had it not been for the inactivity on the part of the CEN, which has been very dilatory in drawing up and adapting the Directive.
If we are to get a common transport market genuinely up and running, it is important that we should not only have regulations but that these regulations should also, as far as possible, apply to every country.
I should like to conclude by commenting on a third matter which is also of significance, namely an amendment tabled by Member of Parliament, Mr Ari Vatanen.
Mr President, I would like to thank not only Mr Koch, but also the Vice-President of the Commission for the clear and unambiguous way in which they have declared their support for safety in the transport sector and acknowledged it as a priority.
We all regret that the European Committee for Standardisation (CEN) has not been able, in the required time, to carry out the amendment of the provisions necessary for the required harmonisation within the European Union.
This debate and the amendment of the Directive currently in force allow us to incorporate differentiating elements which demonstrate the diversity of this Europe of ours.
Of course, we accept that amendment - it is absolutely right - and I believe that we should incorporate specific circumstances which demonstrate the climatic diversity of the European Union, which sometimes take the form of specifics and of concrete requirements for the establishment of standards and characterisations of a technical nature.
I would like to say, with regard to Mr Swoboda's comments on the activity of the CEN, that we are urging them to speed up their work as much as possible because it would be terrible if, despite the new deadline, we were to find ourselves after a year and a bit with the same difficulties because their work has not been concluded.
The Commission accepts all of the contributions of the parliamentary committee and the rapporteur, Mr Koch, which are contained in the various amendments, specifically four.
The next item is the report (A5-0108/1999) by Mrs Schroedter, on behalf of the Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism, on the communication from the Commission in the field of the Structural Funds and their coordination with the Cohesion Fund:
Mr President, it is particularly pleasing for me to make my first speech in the European Parliament on what is regarded as the most important issue within that part of the United Kingdom that I represent in this Parliament, namely Wales.
It is quite clear that many people within Wales are looking to the European Structural Funds programme to alleviate some of the great difficulties that we undoubtedly face.
We are looking, therefore, within the Structural Funds programme not just to see industrial restructuring but also to see a wider improvement in the whole of the economic base within the Principality.
We look to it to challenge the UK Government, to ensure that the private sector, which surely must be providing the major impetus for Structural Funds expenditure, is involved in the planning stage.
We see it as a very positive sign that, in her own conclusions, the rapporteur has taken account of our committee's proposal that the Cohesion Fund countries should broaden the research infrastructure by locating universities and colleges in such a way that they would serve those who live in undeveloped regions better than now and make it easier for educated people to remain in their home districts.
Another matter we would like to address, specifically from the point of view of industrial policy, is that we would have liked the Commission to pay more attention to the effects of services, electronic commerce and the growing use of the Internet, when they were planning the coordination of Structural Funds and Cohesion Funds.
In my opinion the committee drafting the report has not taken sufficient account of this, so on behalf of the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy, I would draw the Commission's attention to this issue.
Finally, as the committee representing energy, we would have liked the issue of support for renewable energy resources from Cohesion and Regional Development funds to have been emphasised still more, thus, through a process of coordination, increasing the use of renewables so that the scant funding resources in the energy programme might have been compensated by means of these more substantial sums.
I would like to draw people's attention to Amendments Nos 1 and 2 which were agreed by the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs but not accepted by the Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism.
These amendments deal with the social economy and the need to provide social risk capital and support financially local schemes to develop employment opportunities and strengthen social cohesion.
We hope that those considering rejection of these amendments have very powerful reasons to offer to both Parliament and their citizens who are seeking employment.