Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-03-13-Speech-2-315"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010313.17.2-315"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, we have in front of us today a very important piece of legislation. It will affect our air quality, our water quality, the general quality of our environment throughout the whole of Europe and beyond in the coming years if we bring it to fruition. That is, of course, if the Member States have the will to do so. The proposal has now reached its second reading. We have insisted very strongly at first reading that the most stringent measures are taken to control gaseous emissions from large combustion plants throughout the Union because of the acid gases that are formed, because of the effects upon the environment, and because of the effects upon human health.
We have now reached the point where we have in front of us the common position. I understand the Council has worked very hard to achieve this and it does propose new and better levels of emissions. However, my group thinks that things can go further. My group thinks that in combination with a number of other factors, Mrs Myller's report which is to follow for example, it is possible to put a little more into this proposal than we see already. In that respect, I would commend to you the amendments, particularly those that apply to the articles and the annex which control the emission limit values from the large combustion plants.
It seems to me that we are confronted with a very difficult choice tonight because we must decide if what we vote tonight is at least in some way acceptable to the Council. The Council has indicated that it is unwilling to accept further amendments from Parliament. If we achieve the appropriate votes tomorrow, that unwillingness becomes an obligation and the Council will have to sit down and negotiate with Parliament. That cannot be a bad thing in terms of the recognition of the ability of this Parliament to achieve a high level of environmental protection for the people of Europe. It seems to me that what we can do tomorrow in the vote is to take a few more steps forward to achieve a little bit more in terms of benefit to the environment. That has to be balanced against the possible consequences for the energy strategies and the energy industries of the European Union.
We are very mindful of that. If you look tonight at the amendments which the Socialists will be supporting, we have relatively long timescales for these new regulations to be incorporated into EU law. We must take this step forward, but inevitably we must also allow for the fact that this step needs to be accommodated not just by the environment but economically as well.
You have in front of you a report with the amendments, the majority of which the Socialist Group can support, some of which we feel go too far. However, I would commend the report to the House."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples