Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-12-15-Speech-3-026"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"1999-12-15"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Climate change2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.19991215.3.3-026"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:1999-12-15-Speech-3-0272
lpv:speaker	lp:Johannes Blokland2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Staatkundig Gereformeerde Partij - Gereformeerd Politiek Verbond - Reformatorisch Politieke Federatie (1999-07-20--2002-03-17)3 co-chair; EDD (1999-07-20--2001-01-29)3 member; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 substitute; ECON (1999-07-21--2000-02-02)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Slovak Republic Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-09-28--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Slovenia Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-09-29--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, I would like to start by thanking Mr Hassi and Commissioner Wallström for their declaration. I share their opinion that the problem of climate change requires a global solution. It is therefore regrettable that so few countries have ratified the Kyoto Protocol. In the resolution, the criticism is expressed that the United States is so unwilling. It is more important to assess our own behaviour. The EU Member States have not yet ratified the Kyoto Protocol. If countries at a climate conference reach an agreement, then it is understood that every effort is made to reach sound implementation and execution. The fact that this environmental problem needs to be solved worldwide does not detract from the huge responsibility incumbent upon each individual Member State. I fully agree with the focus of the resolution being put on energy efficiency and renewable energy sources. The measures involved have a beneficial effect on the environment. However, there are also CO2 reducing measures which, besides said beneficial effects, also cause negative environmental effects. In other words, a reduction in CO2 emissions can never be a licence to emit other harmful substances instead. Therefore, the EU’s energy policy must specifically embrace all environmental effects caused by a specific type of energy production. Then environmental policy will actually be integrated into the energy policy, as laid down in the Treaty. The environment needs to be integrated into the transport policy too. The transport sector accounts for no less than 40% of total CO2 emissions. It is evident that journeys and flights should be reduced. The introduction of excise on kerosene remains a necessary measure, so that flight traffic is no longer given undue preferential treatment in financial terms over other types of transport. Responsibility very much applies to the elected Members of Parliaments. Yesterday, the new building of the European Parliament was opened. I, like many others, cannot explain to the electorate that monthly journeys between Brussels and Strasbourg are necessary. This is, unfortunately, a reality for the time being, but the climate in the European Council will hopefully change."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph