Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-03-14-Speech-2-301"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000314.14.2-301"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I wish to begin by thanking Mrs Myller for her report and her ambitious treatment of the directive proposed by the Commission. Even if the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy appears rather as if it had been caught napping and has only just woken up, the fact may, at all events, be conveyed that the problem of acidification is scarcely a new issue. Instead, it has been with us for as long as industrialisation – for 100 years. Research into the question has been going on for 30 years. None of us ought to be in any doubt about what the sources of acidification are, nor about what we should be doing regarding this issue.
Some accuse the Commission’s proposal, and also the report, as being excessive and far too costly to implement and say that the calculations that have been made are utopian. This is, however, wrong because we know that the Member States themselves have contributed to the report which serves as a basis for the whole directive. There is more justification for criticising the fact that we have not included the energy scenario we have emphasised elsewhere, for example in the Kyoto protocol, and which involves burning fewer fossil fuels in order also to solve the climate problems we are facing.
With all due respect to the Gothenburg protocol – and despite the fact that it has taken its name from my home town – I have to say that it is, in fact, just not on to compare this with the directive which we have to take a decision on tomorrow. One might well wonder why the Commission’s directive appears only a month later, rather like a punishment directed against this UN directive, but that has to do, of course, with nothing other than our own sluggishness in dealing with the issue. If we had been a little quicker off the mark, the present directive would have been on the table – signed, sealed and delivered – long before the so-called Gothenburg Protocol.
The word “impossible” has been used about the directive. I should like to say, however, that what is impossible is the situation which we have at present. The impossibility lies, therefore, not in the directive but in the current situation."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples