Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-02-02-Speech-3-060"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-02-02"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Recourse to the precautionary principle2
dcterms:Language	"sv"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20000202.5.3-060"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-02-02-Speech-3-0612
lpv:speaker	lp:Wallström2
lpv:translated text	"Thank you, Mrs Schörling. These are two important questions, and it is good that I should be given the opportunity to clarify them. No, one must not begin by carrying out a cost-benefit analysis. Instead, the latter should be based upon an assessment of what it is we know, of what science has to tell us and of how we should view the product concerned in the light of the risks we judge there to exist for the environment or for the health of human beings or animals. When, on the other hand, the decision has been made to take a certain measure, the one chosen ought to be cost-effective so that there is in fact no resort to measures which are wholly unreasonable given their degree of effectiveness. It is not, therefore, the case that one must begin with a cost-benefit analysis. The second question concerns the reversed burden of proof. It is perfectly correct that we need to apply this in certain cases. I have used chemical strategy as a good example of an area in which we need to do this. There, however, we are concerned with that particular area, whereas it may be said that the present communication concerning the precautionary principle is horizontal in the sense that it concerns the full range of specific technical areas that are of political concern. Therefore, the issues of the reversed burden of proof and of what the burden of proof is to look like are not especially discussed in this context. Instead, it is a question of political decision-making and of the bases for this. It is, however, perfectly correct that, when it comes, for example, to chemicals, we must ensure that we obtain a reversed burden of proof."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph