Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-03-14-Speech-2-306"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000314.14.2-306"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I certainly welcome this report and I gave it a lot of support in the Environment Committee. I creates a proper framework in which we can work in the long term to reduce emissions. The vast majority of the amendments I can support. There are one or two that went through that I have some doubts about, particularly Amendment No 7, which I cannot see as being environmental at all, or as contributing to the overall attempt to reduce the amount of ozone-depleting substances at ground level anywhere in the Union.
I want to come to the issue which Mr Davies has addressed, namely, where we should start from. With what targets are we to start?
Mr President, a series of quite practical and well-argued and debated figures were arrived at just before Christmas at Gothenburg under the UN/ECE protocol, and it seems to me that is the logical place to start. It would not to my mind be the right place to finish, but it certainly would be the right place to start and it is the reason why I was convinced when I was there in the debate in the Industry Committee, as none of my colleagues from the Environment Committee were, that it was the right place to start. It seems to me that the Commission figures are aspirational. Yes, we could go there – we should be trying to go there, but I do not think we should be starting there. We should be starting with the UN/ECE figures, with the Gothenburg protocol and revising them as is proposed by Mrs Myller in her report."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples