Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-05-02-Speech-3-149"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010502.10.3-149"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, the Chernobyl disaster would have been thought impossible before it happened, even under a dictatorship. Of course, I believe that this sort of thing could never happen in a British, French or German nuclear power station. But we are surrounded by nuclear power stations using obsolete Russian technology. I need only think of Bohunice, Kozlodoui or Ignalina. These power stations cannot be upgraded, even with the very best western technology. In Austria no one – not one party – is in favour of using nuclear energy. We have learned to accept that we cannot force others to follow our example. But what we can do is warn them about dangerous nuclear power stations, about nuclear power stations which would be unable to obtain an operating licence anywhere in the European Union. When someone builds a house, the neighbours are asked if the tree in the garden is too tall and is blocking out too much light. When someone builds a nuclear power station which would not be able to obtain a license anywhere in the European Union, suddenly it is a question of national sovereignty and everyone is insulted if you question safety standards or ask for information.
In Austria – and I think that I really can speak for everyone – we have taken great pains for a long time to call for uniform standards which apply in all the European countries. Commissioner, the same thing has been put to you twice today already. I know full well that we cannot compare French technology, for example, with British technology and that the French industry may wish to guard its secrets. But we must have a minimum consensus. We must be able to say if an old or a new nuclear power station built in a candidate country – and I am thinking quite specifically of Temelin here – is safe. I have to say that, if a nuclear power station would be unable to obtain an operating licence anywhere in the European Union, then I am against it, I do not want any nuclear power stations in any candidate country which do not meet our standards, irrespective of which country has issued them.
We harmonise so much in the European Union – our common values, thank God. We shall soon have a common currency – wonderful. We also hear talk of standard shapes for cucumbers. So why no minimum consensus here?
I have tried to achieve a minimum consensus in my group. I believe that Mr Mombaur or Mr Chichester will be tabling an oral amendment tomorrow. I call on you, if you are still here and can hear me, to vote in favour of this oral amendment.
Commissioner, it is precisely because we are surrounded by dangerous nuclear power stations that I say to you: there is no border at which the danger stops – and I am thinking here of the candidate countries, I am thinking of nuclear power stations which cannot be upgraded and I am thinking of new nuclear power stations which may be built. It must be possible for us to say that we demand British, French or German standards. If we cannot, then what I want to know is why we bother about the shape of cucumbers."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples