Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-01-16-Speech-3-187"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020116.13.3-187"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I would firstly like to thank the rapporteur, for having, at first reading, voiced the concerns of the European Parliament’s Committee on Petitions. Given the daily practice of this Committee, these could only be concerns relating compliance with this legislation, as raised in some of the rapporteur’s amendments and compromise amendments. All policies should be integrated into environmental policy – as stated in some of the amendments – and public participation and information is necessary – also as stated in some of the amendments.
I am not hiding the fact that, as a citizen of a small mining region in Asturias – and I am speaking here in a personal capacity and not on behalf of my group – that I have some problems with the amendment on imposing a time limit on subsidies for projects that could damage the environment. I do not have a problem with it in general terms, but specifically with regard to the fact that, in the region in which I live, more than 30 000 jobs have been lost as a direct result of restructuring. For this reason I do not agree with these amendments. However, we completely agree with the rest of them.
We also agree with some of our fellow Members – and I am sure that my colleague Jonas Sjöstedt would support me here – that this latest proposal is not the one put forward by the European Parliament. This is a proposal that was debated, on which agreements were reached between all of the groups and between the rapporteur and the Commission and the Council to arrive at this latest proposal that we have here. For this reason, I also agree with the rapporteur that we cannot accept, and shall reject, the amendment from the Group of the Europe Liberal, Democrat and Reform party that suggests rejecting the proposal.
The proposal is highly important, Mr President. The Fifth Community Environment Action Programme has come to an end. The European Union needs a clearly defined strategy with commitments and specific timetables for the next few years and it seems to me that this is potentially a clearly defined proposal with commitments and a specific timetable, which, indeed, we have a great need to implement."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples