Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-02-15-Speech-2-280"

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	"pt"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20000215.11.2-280"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-02-15-Speech-2-2812
lpv:speaker	lp:Carlos Lage2
lpv:spokenAs	vice-chair; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (1999-07-21--2001-01-14)3 unknown; Partido Socialista (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Culture, Youth, Education, the Media and Sport (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3 member; PES (1999-07-20--2002-01-16)3 member; Delegations to the parliamentary cooperation committees and delegations for relations with Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Mongolia (1999-10-06--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Commissioner, the framework directive which we are considering today at second reading is a kind of constitutional charter for water which will apply across the European Union. This directive represents both a point of arrival and a point of departure. It is a point of arrival because it was developed from a range of directives which were fragmentary and diffuse, and applies a unified logic and systematic consistency to water legislation. It is also a point of departure because a new framework of reference has been created, into which future European legislation on water will converge and flow. The framework directive seeks to be, and rightly so, both ambitious and realistic, both strong-minded and carefully thought out, and it has, to a large extent, succeeded. Thanks to Mrs Lienemann’s excellent work, the amendments proposed by the Commission will go some way towards strengthening the directive’s text and making it more rigorous. Making it more rigorous does not mean making it more rigid, by ignoring the stark differences in climate and geography across Europe. The rapporteur’s proposal is one which, on the whole, I would wish to support but I would like to express some praise for it and then two concerns. I would first of all like to praise it because the directive’s demand for the integrated management of water basins is undeniably a step forward. This also applies to the demand that water only be transferred between basins when this is shown to be absolutely necessary. This is a principle that will prove beneficial and instructive for the Iberian Peninsula for example. My first concern is about the timetable laid down in the directive: it may prove to be a straitjacket although I think that it also represents a powerful challenge. My second concern is easy to guess: it turns on the difficulties in establishing water charges and in setting prices, particularly when taking environmental costs into account. This is something that causes anxiety, particularly among farmers. Paying a fair price for water may also result in injustices. This framework directive banks on a considerable gamble: that in 2020 European waters will have returned to their natural state, free of pollution and dangerous substances. Is this a Utopian ideal? Is this a return to pre-industrial society? I think not. I give this framework directive my vote of confidence and of optimism. The recent catastrophe on the Danube has illustrated, as in a nightmare, that a long-term policy and strategy for the ecological protection of our water, however much it may cost, is not a luxury of the rich but a necessity for civilisation."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph