Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-07-05-Speech-3-366"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000705.11.3-366"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Ladies and gentlemen, Madam Commissioner, I shall try to be brief, because I do not believe that much of the substance of this directive is contentious within this Parliament. The directive before us is the second offshoot of the Directive on ambient air quality assessment and management, and the proposal is part of an integrated package of measures designed to combat atmospheric pollution. The essential feature of this second offshoot of the air-quality Directive is that it establishes benzene and carbon monoxide limit values for the first time in the European Union. This is a very important step; I would even call it a milestone in the history of air-quality legislation, because it is the first limit value to be imposed for a carcinogenic substance, namely benzene, which can, of course, cause leukaemia. We know that petrol and oil are sources of benzene, and in the European Union 80 to 85% of benzene emissions result from petrol combustion in road vehicles. There has never been a safety threshold, and so benzene emissions have always posed a health risk. The precautionary principle that is enshrined in the EU Treaty, however, makes it imperative to establish a limit value at which the health risk is extremely low. It therefore stands to reason that we are particularly supportive of the proposal for a limit value of five micrograms per cubic metre of air.
The common position is a definite improvement on the Commission's proposal. I also very much welcome the fact that it incorporates many of the amendments adopted by this House. One amendment in particular was absolutely essential and central in our view, for the Commission had proposed that Member States could be granted derogations almost at will. It was effectively a blank cheque that could have been renewed over and over again, and by dropping this provision we have managed to achieve a compromise to which we too can subscribe. In the implementation of the directive it will also be important, of course, to respond to the problems faced by the countries of the South and to arrive at an appropriate compromise. The proposal also corresponds to the suggestion made by Mrs Schleicher at the first reading in the Environment Committee, namely that a single exception may be made, that it must be duly substantiated, that it need not be restricted to countries but can also apply to particular regions or geographical areas and that a concentration in excess of ten micrograms may not be authorised under any circumstances.
It is also very important in the light of our forthcoming enlargement to the East that we should emphasise that the European Union does not operate a two-speed environmental policy and that those Member States to which exceptions apply must make every effort to move towards compliance with EU requirements and must furnish proof of progress in this direction. The Environment Committee has also tabled a number of other amendments, but these should not be contentious either, because they relate primarily to the obligation to provide information. In these we have clearly emphasised that the new instrument of the Internet must be used as a means of improving the flow of information. I have no doubt that these amendments will also have answered the question as to how information is to be communicated. Moreover, we have also drawn attention to the fact that indoor pollution is also a major problem which should be addressed by EU research programmes. We cannot present a credible case for the improvement of outside air quality unless we demonstrate a clear commitment to improving the quality of indoor air. In addition, we have underlined very clearly that the Member States will also have to compile better documentation. Another very important point is that the governments of those Member States to which derogations apply should also inform the public of this special dispensation and of the efforts that are being made to achieve our goal of five micrograms by the year 2010.
I shall close there – my time is up in any case. What is important is that this directive should be swiftly implemented, and I believe we have worked hard towards that aim and that we are unlikely to encounter any problems in achieving it."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples