Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-11-16-Speech-2-134"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.19991116.8.2-134"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I would like to thank the Commissioner for his statement this afternoon on the programme of work being undertaken by the Commission for improving safety in civil nuclear installations in Central and Eastern Europe.
I ask myself, having listened quite carefully to the Commissioner, whether there is any new information in the statement that he has made. He has given us a fair amount of detail and a fair number of promises about what is happening or will happen. I note the time-scale of some of his comments that reactors will be shut down early in 2006 and 2008 – I will come to the question of whether a reactor should be shut down or not and how quickly in a moment.
I must agree with the Commissioner and the Commission position on the primacy of safety issues. I think we can all agree that where nuclear power stations and nuclear installations are concerned, it is absolutely essential that safety, safety of operation, safety of construction and design, be given top priority. For obvious reasons, public opinion has to be assured that this is the case. I also agree that it is essential for countries which are largely dependent upon nuclear power plants for their electricity and energy that closure programmes are phased to allow time to provide replacement capacity. In some countries, when reactors have had to be shut down, there has been a loss of electricity which has caused severe hardship. You have to weigh up that consideration with the debatable issue about safety. We also have to bear in mind that we are still negotiating with countries which are sovereign, independent states and we have to respect their internal procedures. We are in a slightly sensitive position in terms of telling them or asking them or assisting them to do things that we want to do, but that they may not be enthusiastic about doing themselves.
The question is that if a reactor is safe to run until 2006, why is it not safe to run for its full economic life? If it is unsafe it should be closed down immediately. That is the conundrum that faces us. I feel, with respect to the Commissioner, that you have not quite addressed that conundrum this afternoon."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples