Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-10-07-Speech-4-086"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.19991007.6.4-086"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, a nuclear accident always provokes highly emotional reactions, fear and even irrational terror. The events in Chernobyl affected our mood for a long time. But in Tokaimura, the Japanese authorities have themselves recognised that the safety procedures, both in the conversion plant and in the fuel production plant, had not been followed. It was therefore not an unforeseeable accident.
Apart from our sympathy and friendship towards the families affected by this drama, what are the lessons and consequences to be drawn from this accident? The first lesson is clearly that it is imperative that the European and national authorities in each of our States deal with the question of safety procedures. Secondly, it seems very clear to me that the IAEA should intervene more regularly, not only to verify the text of the regulations, which it does too often, but also to do what it has not done often enough, that is, to go to the site to verify that the regulations are really being applied. In the case of Tokaimura, the IAEA should, in any case, ask the Japanese authorities not to authorise the resumption of reprocessing activities before a thorough investigation is carried out and before public and transparent conclusions are published.
For us, the European Parliament, it seems to us more necessary than ever that the European Commission, within the framework of its Euratom competences, not only lends its assistance to Japan in the current circumstances, but also asks the Euratom services to carry out a complete analysis of the official safety regulations for our power stations, and around our power stations, in Europe. In this way, it would be in a position to ascertain whether all the safety conditions are being respected and to know whether further urgency procedures can be added in the case of regrettable human negligence, which are ultimately much worse or at least they have been in the last few years, than the unforeseeable accident which, by definition, can spread terror.
We are in favour, Mr President, of the use of nuclear energy and we know that, in the European Union, the safety rules and conditions are stricter and more respected. Or at least we are told, for example, that the initiation of a nuclear chain reaction as a result of faulty handling by an operator is practically impossible in Europe. This is what happened in Tokaimura.
We wish to avoid two pitfalls, Mr President. On the one hand, the blind, unconditional and uncontrolled support for nuclear energy. But also on the other hand, the manipulation by too many people of public opinion in order to spread irrational fears and terrors which were well known a thousand years ago. These were the famous millennium fears of the year 1000. Today, they are the fears on the eve of the year 2000. No, nuclear power does not kill any more than a traditional source such as coal has killed and still kills. That is the purpose of our resolution today."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples