Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-02-15-Speech-2-279"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-02-15"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Community policy in the field of water (continuation)2
dcterms:Language	"en"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20000215.11.2-279"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-02-15-Speech-2-2802
lpv:speaker	lp:John Bowis2
lpv:spoken text	"Mr President, here we have what is basically a good measure. It sets out achievable standards based on subsidiarity principles and the water basin management. Its aim of good-quality water for drinking, for wildlife, the environment and economic purposes is right. The prevention of pollution and water deterioration has to be right as well as the ability to manage water in times of drought and flood. We have three outstanding problems. The first is the transfer of water between basin areas. That is a matter which affects my colleagues from Spain, Ireland and the United Kingdom. Amendments Nos 4. 49 and 87 would not be acceptable because they would restrict the ability of a country to move water from where it is in supply to where it is needed, be that arid areas or urban areas. Secondly, we have to have realistic targets, but targets nevertheless. Looking at Amendment No 7, for example, which calls for the complete elimination of naturally occurring substances, you can see that some of the targets set are unrealistic. Also, some of the targets which are set at close to zero – in English, that is quite a meaningless term. We need to look very carefully at those. The concept of continuing reduction as in Amendment No 58 is much better. Thirdly, I raise the problem faced by Scotch whisky. Scotch whisky – especially malt whisky, which is the best – requires water extraction which is used in some quantity and then returned to the water stream. Some of it ends up in the bottle and is drunk. We must make sure that Amendments Nos 49 and 87 leave the deletion exemption so that whisky can continue to be drunk in "high quality", which means it must use good, Scottish peat water. That is my third request – that we look carefully at these measures before passing this measure as a whole."@en1
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Conservative and Unionist Party (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 vice-chair; Delegations to the parliamentary cooperation committees and delegations for relations with Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Mongolia (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3 member; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Committee on Development and Cooperation (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; EPP-ED (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"Bowis (PPE-DE )."1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph