MEPs clashed during a plenary session on Thursday 14 June on the mandates for the inter-institutional negotiations between the Parliament/Council "trialogues) on the social and market questions in the first mobility package. These questions include postings for lorry drivers, rest and driving time and cabotage. The texts will therefore again be submitted for a vote during the next plenary session.
These votes are part of article 69 of the European Parliament's internal regulation, which has been creating tension for a number of days within the main political groups (see EUROPE 12039). The result of these votes remained uncertain until the very last moment.
On one hand, MEPs that support social harmonisation would like to get back to the negotiating mandates granted at Parliament's transport committee on 4 June last and therefore reopen the texts (see EUROPE 12034). The supporters of sector liberalisation, however, would like to ratify the mandate for the trialogues. This is despite the fact the European Union transport ministers were unable to obtain a general approach on Thursday 7 June (see EUROPE 12036).
It is, ultimately, the adversaries of the result of the votes on 4 June that have won. This is because Parliament rejected these three mandates by a large majority (80 vote difference between the votes for and against on postings, 140 on cabotage and 243 on rest and driving time).
Although the opposition on the day of Parliament's transport committee vote between western European and central, eastern and peripheral European countries was pronounced, the dynamics were slightly different during the plenary session.
This division re-emerged at the vote on postings but not on the two other texts. Opposition from several MEPs from western Europe in the EPP Group and a certain homogeneity at the S&D, ECR and EFDD clearly tipped the balance in favour of those opposing the text on drivers' rest and working time put forward by Wim Van de Camp (EPP, the Netherlands).
Faced with this result, he called on his group to vote against the negotiating mandate for the text on cabotage submitted by Ismail Ertug (S&D, Germany), which was rejected, despite support from the majority of the S&D Group.
Under Parliament’s procedural rules, the texts now have to be put to a vote at the next plenary session, following the submittal of the new amendments. This is also the first time since the entry into force of the new internal Parliament rules of 16 January 2017 that the negotiating mandates put to a vote under the terms of article 69 of the internal regulation have been rejected.
Mixed reactions.
Similarly to the negotiations and votes, the reactions were swift in coming and revealed very significant differences of interpretation.
The Chairperson of Parliament's transport committee, who is opposed to the negotiating mandates in the form that they were submitted to a vote during this plenary session, Karima Delli (Greens/EFA, France) thanked the MEPs that voted against the mandates and stated “the fight continues for fair working conditions for lorry drivers and all lorry drivers throughout Europe”.
Franck Proust and Renaud Muselier (EPP, France) also opposed the results of the votes of 4 June but welcomed the fact that the efforts made had “paid off”. They added “We will defend strong positions to put a stop to unfair competition in Europe”. Kathleen Van Brempt (S&D, Belgium) was delighted that the results had sent out a “message for a social Europe".
At the other end of the spectrum, Mr Van de Camp appeared disappointed with these votes and added “Parliament today missed a crucial opportunity to improve the position of drivers in Europe. Rejecting the vote today means extending the unacceptable working conditions that we are trying to combat”.
Kosma Złotowski (ECR, Poland) also stated that “The results of today's vote are unfortunately synonymous with a rejection of a very good compromise adopted at the Parliament's transport committee”. (Original version in French by Lucas Tripoteau)