Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-12-13-Speech-3-325"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-12-13"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Assessment and management of environmental noise2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20001213.11.3-325"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-12-13-Speech-3-3262
lpv:speaker	lp:Bernd Lange2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation for relations with South Africa (1999-10-06--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3 member; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; PES (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	". Mr President, when I look at the proposal the Commission presented, I cannot help thinking of a scene in which a man is sitting by a stream in Finland, trying to catch salmon with a net. But the mesh is so wide that every salmon slips through. With that image in mind, I find it commendable that we are trying to tighten the mesh of the Commission's proposal in exactly the same way as we did with air and water quality. The first thing we need for this is a framework directive which prescribes measuring procedures and action plans, thereby establishing the basis for a general standardisation of noise-abatement policies. Secondly, we need daughter directives which establish quality standards. In the realm of noise-abatement policy we must take particular care in determining the quality standards we wish to have; they must provide a basis on which the noise produced by air, rail and road traffic can be compared as well as taking account of the effects of different dosage levels. We must know the precise levels at which exposure starts to harm people in the long and short term. This means that daughter directives have to be developed very carefully, and this effort must go hand in hand with the development of limit values for particular sources of noise in a combined approach. So we do need a framework directive and we need the combined approach, and I therefore regard much of what the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy has decided as right and proper. I have problems, however, with Amendment No 10 and Amendments Nos 36 and 37, which would bring the specific matter of aviation noise into the framework directive, thereby forestalling the daughter directive. We should examine that very carefully and then pursue the implementation of both parts of the combined approach, namely the establishment of limit values for the various sources of noise on the one hand and quality standards for noise sources on the other. This, I believe, is the way we should proceed."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"(Applause)"1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph