Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-04-02-Speech-1-076"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-04-02"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Environmental issues of PVC2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20010402.6.1-076"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-04-02-Speech-1-0772
lpv:speaker	lp:Emilia Franziska Müller2
lpv:spokenAs	vice-chair; Delegation to the EU-Slovak Republic Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3 member; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Christlich-Soziale Union in Bayern e.V. (1999-07-20--2003-11-05)3 member; Temporary committee on human genetics and other new technologies in modern medicine (2000-12-13--2001-11-29)3 member; Committee on Women's Rights and Equal Opportunities (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 substitute; AGRI (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; EPP-ED (1999-07-20--2003-11-05)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, there is no doubt that PVC is a material with advantages and disadvantages. It is certainly wrong to confine ourselves solely to the problems of disposing of PVC. Instead, the entire lifecycle of PVC needs to be assessed from various points of view, namely the production of the raw material, its manufacture, use and processing, recycling and finally disposal. PVC is impressive above all because of the diversity of its applications and its long lifespan and thus has a wide variety of uses in particular in the building sector, as well as in many other sectors including medicine. The Commission Green Paper and Mr Sacconi's report put particular emphasis on additives, especially the cadmium and lead-based stabilisers. Industry already voluntarily refrains from using cadmium in PVC products today. The use of lead is also becoming less common. In certain product groups, for example, window frames, many firms are already using calcium-zinc compounds as a substitute for this stabiliser today. We should reward this willingness of industry to innovate and protect the environment by continuing to pursue and promote the system of voluntary commitments. Binding legislative measures should only be contemplated if industry falls well short of agreed targets to reduce heavy metals or increase the percentage of PVC which is recycled. A general ban on PVC products would be nothing short of fatal for 530,000 employees in the PVC sector throughout Europe, 170,000 in Germany alone. That is why it is particularly important for socio-economic factors to be taken into account when alternatives to PVC are developed. Against this background it would be irresponsible to call for a moratorium on PVC. Compulsory marking of PVC products would also lead to considerable distortions of competition. This would neither apply equally to all products nor would it deliver a noticeable environmental benefit. The introduction of a PVC levy, the separation of hard and soft PVC and a ban on PVC in the building sector would be a particular burden on small and medium-sized enterprises throughout Europe. In the European Union alone, 21,000 small and medium-sized companies are affected. PVC as a material needs to undergo a thorough assessment of its entire life-cycle. The problems and advantages need to be weighed up with a critical eye. As things currently stand, a general ban on PVC is neither possible nor sensible and should not therefore be advocated in this Green Paper."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph