Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-09-07-Speech-4-133"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20000907.5.4-133"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
"Mr President, together with those who submitted the joint resolution, I, too, would like to express my deepest sympathy to the relatives of the Kursk nuclear submarine crew who died. May they find comfort and strength in God, who can only truly gauge their sorrow and will gladly relieve their suffering. The dreadful humanitarian disaster involving the Kursk once again brought home to the Russian population and to us how dangerous the consequences of accidents involving nuclear-powered installations and craft can be, and how important it is to comply with nuclear safety regulations. This awareness-raising process has been set in motion, not least thanks to – and I would like to stress this here – those directly involved: Russian citizens and social organisations with a sense of responsibility. Their names are no secret. Not only do they deserve our respect, but also all the European support we can provide. How irresponsible, on the other hand, is the way the Russian authorities, fronted by the country’s military apparatus, deal with atomic energy? And that for as long as we can remember. The nuclear contamination of the village Muslyumovo, in the southern Ural, with plutonium – and this is as long ago as 1949 – is a poignant example of this utterly reprehensible behaviour. According to a lady in the village, in the old days, mothers would contract leukaemia at the age of fifty. The same fate would befall their daughters at the tender age of twenty; nowadays, their grandchildren suffer from this deadly disease as young as two. The joint resolution is absolutely right in highlighting the considerable nuclear risks which the dozens of scrapped nuclear submarines of the Russian northern fleet constitute. For the city of Murmansk and direct surroundings, I would like to add one major danger to this huge, potential risk to both the public and the environment, namely the cargo ship Lepse. Since the early sixties, this ship has served as a warehouse for atomic waste originating from nuclear-powered ice breakers. Due to the Lepse’s bad condition, its nuclear cargo should be transferred to and made safe in special containers ashore. At least, that has been the plan for years. Why has nothing been done about it? The answer is simple. It is down to the irresponsible attitude of the authorities, which refuse to meet the financier of the project, i.e. the European Union, halfway on two essential points: signing the agreement whereby Russia shoulders the responsibility for the activities, and the tax-free import of the required equipment for the operation. This is a striking example of Russia’s official stance in urgent matters of nuclear safety. The nuclear scandal in Moscow, which dates back to 1995, is also salient in this respect. At the time, the director of the scientific institute which developed nuclear, Chernobyl-like reactors, came up with an ‘enlightened’ plan to increase the budget of his institute by providing heating for the houses in the vicinity by means of the institute’s research reactor. The neighbourhood was tipped off in time and the whole plan was called off. In fact, the reactor was closed down. And how did the director Jevgeni Adamov fare? He made it to Russia’s Minister for Atomic Energy and is dreaming of another, far more profitable project, a real money-spinner: Russia as collection and processing point for foreign radioactive waste. May this serve as a warning to Europe."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph