Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-07-05-Speech-3-361"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000705.10.3-361"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:spokenAs | |
lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I believe that tomorrow's vote will truly be a litmus test of whether we regard EMAS as an instrument of ecological progress or as a mere sham. It must be made clear that EMAS accreditation is intended as a reward for those companies which are the real engines of ecological progress. BAT – the best available technology – is the fundamental prerequisite of EMAS, because it would be downright absurd for a company to be regarded as an environmental trailblazer if it did not use the best available technology, and it is surely plain to see that anything else boils down to ISO 14000, in other words to our simply selling EMAS down the river, because it would then be ISO in another guise. In that case we could forget the directive altogether, because it would correspond to ISO. For that reason I fail to understand the misgivings that have been voiced, particularly with regard to small and medium-sized businesses, because it is precisely those firms which have the least onerous obligations in this respect. Conversely, we have seen time and again that many small and medium-sized enterprises are far more innovative than their larger counterparts.
EMAS is an important voluntary instrument for companies, but paramount importance attaches to its coordination with environmental programmes. Studies in Germany have shown that, unfortunately, EMAS organisations have not yet recognised protection of the climate, for example, as a major goal. From that point of view I believe that we should not sell ourselves short here by putting EMAS on a par with ISO."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples