Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-02-02-Speech-3-059"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20000202.5.3-059"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
"Mr President, I have two questions. I shall try to be very brief indeed. The first question concerns the implementation of the precautionary principle. As I have understood it, there has been a certain lack of clarity in some respects as to how this is to be understood. Is it the case that a risk assessment is firstly to be carried out, including a cost-benefit analysis? In that case, I am rather concerned, because the idea was really that a cost-benefit analysis should not be used as a tool for deciding whether the precautionary principle should be introduced. Instead, the precautionary principle should come first. My second question concerns the burden of proof. I remember Margot Wallström being introduced as Commissioner in the Committee. At that time, she was talking about the desire for a reversed burden of proof. In other words, a product’s manufacturer is to demonstrate whether or not the product is hazardous. I want to know whether this also applies in the document which the Commission has presented now."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph