Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-05-31-Speech-4-101"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-05-31"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:VOTE2
dcterms:Language	"es"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20010531.3.4-101"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-05-31-Speech-4-1022
lpv:speaker	lp:Cristina Gutiérrez-cortines2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Committee on Culture, Youth, Education, the Media and Sport (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; EPP-ED (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Partido Popular (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation for relations with South-east Europe (1999-10-06--2002-01-14)3 vice-chair; Delegation to the EU-Lithuania Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-10-25--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Turkey Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-11-11--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy (2001-02-08--2002-01-14)3 member; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (1999-10-07--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Temporary committee on human genetics and other new technologies in modern medicine (2000-12-13--2001-11-29)3
lpv:translated text	"I would like to justify why the Group of the European People’s Party voted against the Myller report while saying that we fully support the project and the Commission’s Environment Action Programme. The Commission drew up an excellent, very balanced and scientific programme, with a great sense of the future, and which aimed to be a document that would arrive in Johannesburg with all the dignity of Europe, proclaiming a viable, feasible environmental policy that is accessible to all and can be implemented and made a reality. However, here in Parliament many amendments have been introduced. As a group, we cannot accept any of them. As a group, in order to demonstrate our willingness, we have broadened the usual horizons of the environment and we have added very clear support for the urban environment, which did not previously exist, we have increased interest in the countryside and the rural environment, we have also supported municipal participation, which did not feature in the proposal, and we have also supported public health with great enthusiasm. However, we find that measures have been introduced which are impossible for citizens to comply with. The level has been raised so high that it is impossible even for the enlargement countries to achieve it. We think that we need to govern with our heads and with a spirit of solidarity towards the citizens. We cannot impose things so that we, the Members, get the credit, and profess to belong to the ‘greenest’ group of all, while it is causing major problems for the people. For example, with regard to labelling, complying with the standard would require all companies, including the smallest ones, to have a large amount of bureaucracy devoted to filling in labels, and small companies would have to take out civil liability insurance. It would be crazy what the people would have to do if these measures had to be applied. As far as taxes are concerned, a general European tax would fall on the poorest people, those who live outside the cities, etc. For all of these reasons, we voted against the report because we defend the people and a viable and common sense model."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph