After the rejection by the European Parliament in the first proposal for a directive "port services", in November 2003, it was thought that the Commission repenserait his approach before exiting new (revised) text. Such was not the case. Convinced that the new majority that reinforces the right wing in the European Parliament would play in its favor, it launched in the months that followed, a "port package II"; hardest and most controversial of the previous version.
The definition of a ports policy falls within the general European interest
Result: a new defeat on January 18, 2006, clearer than the previous. The ETF has welcomed this vote and the withdrawal of the proposal by Commissioner Jacques Barrot. Indeed, European ports are among the highest performing and most competitive in the world and no solution "ready-made" can impose himself on the diversity of our port systems. In addition, the focus with emphasis on the single command sparked strong opposition of the representatives of the labour force. We had the impression, in the guise of liberalisation, that a hidden agenda was in fact intended to undermine the work of trade unions in the sector. Where the non-cooperation of the dockers (see article on Le Havre, p.4).
However, early we were willing to discuss possible solutions and priorities at European level. In fact, the ETF supports the European strategy for a "sustainable" transport And such a strategy cannot be conceived in the interest of such operator or segment of the transport chain. It is on the contrary the European public interest which must preside at its development; which implies a stronger involvement of both Member States and the Commission in its role as regulator. The market itself cannot, or will want to - and this is not its role - give priority to the defence of the general interest.
The ETF, the Espo and the Feport together to find common solutions
Ports are only a link in the transport policy and, as such, the Commission must integrate its port policy in a broader vision of sustainable transport. This is why we welcome the intention to include these ideas in the mid-term review of the white paper on European Transport policy; including its guidance more "environmental". It will give the opportunity to open the discussion on a number of problems, in the light of the events since 2001.
The ETF would be particularly glance a good that the Commission addresses the issues of investment, transparency of funding, aid to State and the role that ports in a network of intermodal transport. It is of the opinion that only the consultation and dialogue can find acceptable solutions. It is one of the reasons for which we have repeatedly invited the employers of the port sector to establish a sectoral Committee of social dialogue on ports to reach the reconciliations for the adoption of common solutions to common problems.
For example, it should develop a joint position ETF/Espo/Feport (2) on the motorways of the sea; variable geometry and confused concept. The ETF will bring its stone building in searching for compromise solutions to even, subsequently, to improve the performance of European ports while safeguarding employment and the working conditions of workers.
(1) European Transport Workers Federation
(2) Espo: European Seaport Conference; and Feport: Federation of European Port Operators.
4 distributed among approximately 70 heirsThe Group also communicates well enough in the matterBertrand Méheut refused to say how it arbitreraitIt would be very irresponsible to not do soIt is a tragedy for my family my company and for me personallyoutside any platform for Exchange regulated or notComing finally to what was called the Airbus of the satellites iThe Turing test is the Holy Grail of research in artificial intelligence7 hours in 2002 the effective duration is to 39The average annual growth is limited to 1
