Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-01-16-Speech-2-158"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-01-16"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Environment directives2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20010116.9.2-158"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-01-16-Speech-2-1592
lpv:speaker	lp:Ria Oomen-ruijten2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation for relations with South Africa (1999-10-06--2002-01-14)3 member; EPP-ED (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 vice-chair; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (1999-09-22--2002-01-14)3 substitute; EMPL (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Temporary committee on the Echelon interception system (2000-07-06--2001-09-05)3 substitute; Committee on Women's Rights and Equal Opportunities (1999-07-20--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Christen Democratisch Appèl (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market (1999-11-04--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, I very much welcome the fact that we as Parliament also fulfil our monitoring competences and that we take a look at directives which meet with a great deal of criticism in the Member States. Not only do they meet with a great deal of criticism in the Member States, they also cause enormous division in the European Parliament. I would like to comment on two directives today. These are the habitats directive and the nitrates directive. What do these two directives have in common? The fact that the Member States have been granted far-reaching powers to designate nature reserves, species to be protected, and certainly as far as the nitrates directive is concerned, the sensitive areas. There are now an increasing number of complaints from members of the Dutch Lower Chamber of the States General who ask us what in God’s name we have been up to. However, it is not Europe which prescribed that the whole of the Netherlands should be designated a nitrate-sensitive area. It is the Netherlands itself which decided to do so. It is then up to us, with the kind help of a number of MEPs, to see how, by means of derogation requests, we can undo the nitrate legislation, for example, in order to reach the goal, this being a reduction in nitrate levels, in a decent fashion. The same applies to the habitats directive. Today’s tragedy, a cross-border industrial site between Aachen and Maastricht, has been brought to a standstill for the umpteenth time because of two European hamsters. These hamsters were spirited away by a campaign group for the protection and preservation of this species who believed that, if they abducted the hamsters, they could get them to mate. But forced mating is something which does not work, even in the animal kingdom. Once again, for the umpteenth time, the Council of State in the Netherlands brought a cross-border industrial site to a standstill. However, having scrutinised the habitats directive and having correctly interpreted the regulation on areas where preservation is required, we see that this measure was unnecessary. What should happen now, and that is why I support the report on the habitats directive, and most certainly the nitrates directive, is for the European Commission to make it quite clear – and perhaps lay down in writing in clear Dutch language – what is and is not possible. We agree on the principles, they are sound, but the way in which the Member States deal with them is disgraceful by any standard."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph