<s>[INST] The next text is a question of a member of the European parliament:"At the European Parliament's public hearing on the new ports directive on 14June 2005, MrLamoureux (DG TREN) stated that the European Commission had certainly had an impact assessment study carried out in relation to the directive in question. This study was eight years old, and documentation was available.  On 15June 2005 the Commission published a communication (IP/05/733) announcing its intention to strengthen the rules on impact assessments. Paragraph 7 mentions a requirement to consult with stakeholders in order to acquire a full picture of potential impacts.  Can the Commission confirm that an impact assessment study has in fact been carried out in relation to the ports directive and that the study is in fact eight years old?        —  If no impact assessment study has been produced, does the Commission still intend to have one carried out?      —  If this impact assessment study is available, does the Commission agree that it is out of the question that an eight-year-old study could be used for a current legislative dossier?      —  If the Commission still decides to use this old impact assessment study as a basis for its legislation, could it indicate whether this study demonstrates that there is an absolute necessity for a ports directive?    During the public hearing it emerged that, for a variety of reasons, many stakeholders — including workers' representatives — did not regard the new proposal for a ports directive as practicable. Has the Commission — as proposed in paragraph7 of its communication (IP/05/733) — consulted with all stakeholders, and especially with workers' representatives? What arguments are being put forward by the Commission to defend a proposal that does not at all have the approval of port workers?"
Analyze carefully the text and assign it to the most relevant policy area among those listed below. Do not explain your answer and return only a number.
Policy area numbers: 1 = Macroeconomics
2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties
3 = Health
4 = Agriculture and Fisheries
5 = Labour, employment and pensions
6 = Education
7 = Environment
8 = Energy
9 = Immigration
10 = Transportation
12 = Law and Crime
13 = Social welfare
14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning
15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues
16 = Defence
17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues
18 = Foreign trade
19 = International affairs and foreign aid
20 = Governance and government
21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues
23 = Culture and media
[/INST]. Answer = [10]. </s>
At the European Parliament's public hearing on the new ports directive on 14June 2005, MrLamoureux (DG TREN) stated that the European Commission had certainly had an impact assessment study carried out in relation to the directive in question. This study was eight years old, and documentation was available.  On 15June 2005 the Commission published a communication (IP/05/733) announcing its intention to strengthen the rules on impact assessments. Paragraph 7 mentions a requirement to consult with stakeholders in order to acquire a full picture of potential impacts.  Can the Commission confirm that an impact assessment study has in fact been carried out in relation to the ports directive and that the study is in fact eight years old?        —  If no impact assessment study has been produced, does the Commission still intend to have one carried out?      —  If this impact assessment study is available, does the Commission agree that it is out of the question that an eight-year-old study could be used for a current legislative dossier?      —  If the Commission still decides to use this old impact assessment study as a basis for its legislation, could it indicate whether this study demonstrates that there is an absolute necessity for a ports directive?    During the public hearing it emerged that, for a variety of reasons, many stakeholders — including workers' representatives — did not regard the new proposal for a ports directive as practicable. Has the Commission — as proposed in paragraph7 of its communication (IP/05/733) — consulted with all stakeholders, and especially with workers' representatives? What arguments are being put forward by the Commission to defend a proposal that does not at all have the approval of port workers?