Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-05-15-Speech-2-059"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010515.4.2-059"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, as a result of our work today, the Water Framework Directive, which entered into force in December 2000, will be fleshed out with the listing of 32 specific substances in Annex X. The Group of the European Peoples’ Party is in agreement with the proposal from the Commission. All the amendments supported by our group help to bring the text of the annex into line with that of the Water Framework Directive. The rapid adoption of this list is a matter of priority for our group, because only then will the Commission be able to get down to its main task of formulating proposals for the treatment of every single one of these 32 substances.
This can then mean banning substances and phasing them out or permitting their continued use, subject to certain conditions. The aim, however, is always the same, namely either not to let these substances enter water at all in future or only to let them enter water in weak concentrations. The concept of water in the context of the directive covers all water – groundwater, surface water, rivers and lakes, right down to the smallest stream and even perhaps the smallest puddle, and, of course, the sea. It goes without saying that this wide range of aquatic environments will require widely differing sets of rules. After all, we are not starting from scratch here in Europe, because many of these 32 substances are already covered by the Directive on plant-protection products, the Biocides Directive and the Directive on existing substances. Moreover, when the entire body of EU legislation on chemical substances is realigned, we shall be compelled to subject all these substances to thorough scrutiny once again. For this reason we should take great care to ensure that there is no duplication of effort, and hence unnecessary expense. We can spend the money more fruitfully elsewhere for the benefit of the environment. Our aim here is to determine the impact of these substances on our water resources.
We have learned that the Swedish Presidency is keen to have this matter concluded swiftly. We intend to support its pursuit of that goal. Our group will not stand in its way. Anyone who is seriously committed to the protection of our European waters should adopt the same position. Mrs Breyer has already stressed a point that I should like to re-emphasise, namely that Parliament has achieved a resounding success in the creation of the Water Framework Directive and that its fruits are already being harvested today. After all, its classification of eleven substances out of the 32 as priority hazardous substances has ensured that their discharge into water resources will be stopped within the foreseeable future. But I also wish to thank the Commission for its painstaking work and for the comprehensive information which it has provided and which has been of great assistance to me in my role as shadow rapporteur.
My thanks are also due to our rapporteur, Mrs Breyer, for all her efforts."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples