Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-12-13-Speech-3-327"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20001213.11.3-327"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I welcome the opportunity to speak on this important framework directive even though I would have appreciated a few weeks maybe until the January plenary session to have a proper dialogue with all the parties involved as that would have made for sounder legislation in the end. Nonetheless I welcome the framework directive and certainly, before the specific points contained in Amendment No 36 and others were introduced, it would have been welcome all round this House.
This is the first directive that deals with ambient noise as distinct from noise from a particular common source and that is to be welcomed. We all know the health hazards that noise brings to all our lives. It is an increasing hazard and how we go about handling it will be a measure of how successful we are. We cannot bounce people or communities or industries into specific standards without proper dialogue and consultation.
Could I also ask whether the Commission could refer to the business impact assessment, which I am assuming they carried out on this proposal as is required under the Treaty. I would like to know what the bottom line actually was. I would fully support the need to harmonise noise indicators and assessment methods; the whole area of noise maps; the drawing up of action plans to reduce noise and protect quiet areas as appropriate and to broaden the whole scope for information to the public. I would also hope that when we get to a daughter directive, rather than this framework directive, in which we have the specific standards for an EU-wide playing field that the terrain and conditions and demography in each area will be taken into account and we will have time to debate that properly.
That is what we should be doing and how we should be handling it. For example, Amendment No 36 cites average measurements particularly in relation to night-time but one aircraft in the eight hours of night-time could come in so loudly and so noisily that it could wake the entire neighbourhood and yet comply with what is required by Amendment No 36. That is not what we want. It is not averages, it is specifics. We needed more time and I regret we did not have it even though I generally support the framework directive."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples